DP 9.13 available

[JSmith1234567]

DP 9.13 STRESS TEST

I just installed DP 9.13 AND 9.02 on my Mac. DP 8.13 is also on this Mac.

As I have some DP projects that require a buffer of 1024 in order to playback properly, I was concerned with DP 9.13’s performance on these projects given that I can not raise the buffer any higher than 1028. Here are the results of my tests.

COMPUTER: 2012 Mac Pro 5,1 2 x 2.4Ghz 6 Core Xeon, 12 GB Ram
OS: Sierra 10.12.4

DP SEQ FILE SIZE: 14 MB
DP SEQ RAM USEAGE: 3.80-4 GB (with about 4GB system RAM to spare)

PLUG-INS IN PROJECT: WAVES, KUSH, PSP, IZOTOPE, XFER RECORDS, KEILWERTH, SPL, EVENTIDE, MDA, SOUNDTOYS, SUGARBYTES

VIs IN PROJECT: VPS, REFX, PAPEN, SYNAPSE

TRACK COUNT: ABOUT 150 (mostly audio and auxes)

TRACK’S BUSSING/ROUTING: Most tracks are bussed to one of five auxes (set A), those five auxes are then further bussed to either one of two aux inputs (set B). Finally, those two auxes are then bussed to the input of an Audio track where the Final Mix is recorded.

BUFFER: 1024 for all DP versions (max my system will allow)


RESULTS:

DP 8.07:
DP Processing Meter: 95%
Performance: Not exactly snappy but works.
CPU Usage in Apple’s Activity Monitor: Around 26%

DP 9.02:
DP Processing Meter: 90%
CPU Usage in Apple’s Activity Monitor: Around 26%
Performance: Similar to 8.13, not snappy but works.


DP 9.13:
DP Processing Meter: 80%
CPU Usage in Apple’s Activity Monitor: Around 25%

Performance: Plays, but barely.
Selecting with mouse is extremely sluggish, 5 sec or more spinning beachball for anything, including something as simple as changing the cursor type.

STEPS TAKEN TO HELP DP 9.13 BETTER PLAY BACK SEQUENCE:

1) Used Load feature to import into empty DP 9 sequence.
Result: NO PERCEPTIBLE CHANGE

2) Increased prime seconds from 125 to to 500.
Result: NO PERCEPTIBLE CHANGE

3) Deleted unused takes.
Result: NO PERCEPTIBLE CHANGE

4) Deleted all plug-ins from Master Fader.
Result: NO PERCEPTIBLE CHANGE

5) Routed ALL tracks to MASTER FADER OUT, removing all aux bussing in sequence:
Result: SLIGHT IMPROVEMENT
Still sluggish but can change curser type and scroll through input/output lists much faster. Playback is still not as smooth as DP 8.13.

6) Rerouted one CPU intensive reverb (Eventide Blackhole - or a similarly CPU demanding reverb) directly to MASTER FADER OUT:
Result: SLIGHT IMPROVEMENT
Still sluggish but can change curser type and scroll through input/output lists much faster.

CONCLUSIONS BASED ON THIS ONE TEST:

1) If you have a project that previously ran at your maximum buffer setting in a version of DP prior to 9.13, your sequence may be unable to play properly in DP 9.13.
Previous to DP 9.13, you could double the Host Buffer Multiplier in order to slightly increase performance. That feature is no longer available in 9.13.

2) As I have noticed in previous versions of DP, extensive bussing comes at a cost.
Bussing auxes to additional auxes, especially if there are intensive reverb plug-ins involved, appears to greatly increase the strain on DP.

3) Unexpectedly, the load on the CPU appears to be slightly less in DP 9.13 even though performance seems to indicate the opposite of that. MOTU tech support previously suggested doubling the buffer setting in DP 9.13 which seems to support the likelihood of increased CPU load. Not sure why DP’s and Apple’s metering suggests otherwise. Maybe there is something on my system that is skewing those particular readings.

4) As usual, Apple’s Activity Monitor shows much less strain than DP’s Processing Meter. I recently read that DP, Logic and Pro Tools are all close to each other in how many plug-ins can be run so one might assume they would also exhibit the same lower than expected Activity Monitor CPU readings - which leads me to:

5) I may need a more powerful computer.

I've never understood why aux busses seem to take such a huge toll on processing power?

I can have a huge template, but adding even just a few auxes just slams the performance meter and slows things to molasses.

[Robert Randolph]

I've never understood why aux busses seem to take such a huge toll on processing power?

I can have a huge template, but adding even just a few auxes just slams the performance meter and slows things to molasses.

Because they interrupt the ability for the pre-gen system to work. Nothing on an AUX can be pre-gen'd.

[ccrane]

I've never understood why aux busses seem to take such a huge toll on processing power?

I can have a huge template, but adding even just a few auxes just slams the performance meter and slows things to molasses.

Because they interrupt the ability for the pre-gen system to work. Nothing on an AUX can be pre-gen'd.

This would happen even before 'pre-gen'. I always assumed that it takes a lot out of DP to shuffle many tracks worth of data while also tallying the latency compensations.

[dix]

I've never understood why aux busses seem to take such a huge toll on processing power?

I can have a huge template, but adding even just a few auxes just slams the performance meter and slows things to molasses.

Because they interrupt the ability for the pre-gen system to work. Nothing on an AUX can be pre-gen'd.

I don't get this. Everything in my setup is bussed to a master Aux, yet clearly pre-gen, and all it's benefits and peculiarities are in effect.

[Robert Randolph]

I've never understood why aux busses seem to take such a huge toll on processing power?

I can have a huge template, but adding even just a few auxes just slams the performance meter and slows things to molasses.

Because they interrupt the ability for the pre-gen system to work. Nothing on an AUX can be pre-gen'd.

I don't get this. Everything in my setup is bussed to a master Aux, yet clearly pre-gen, and all it's benefits and peculiarities are in effect.

The tracks leading to the Aux are pre-gen'd. The Aux itself is not.

[dix]

Ah. So is there a way, with bussing to, circumvent the pre-gen of a VI?

[1280bregs]

Hi MOTUnation-ers,

I work on the DP team at MOTU (recently, toodamnhip shared a post I wrote to the DP Facebook group here). I'm going to be keeping a closer eye on this forum and wanted to introduce myself.

Also, for users experiencing crashes when editing fades in 9.13:

There's a new Digital Performer (v9.13 72621) on motu.com/downloads. This build resolves the fade crash bug.

Thanks,
Andrew

[HCMarkus]

Hi MOTUnation-ers,

I work on the DP team at MOTU (recently, toodamnhip shared a post I wrote to the DP Facebook group here). I'm going to be keeping a closer eye on this forum and wanted to introduce myself.

Also, for users experiencing crashes when editing fades in 9.13:

There's a new Digital Performer (v9.13 72621) on motu.com/downloads. This build resolves the fade crash bug.

Thanks,
Andrew

Cool! Thanks Andrew.

[FMiguelez]

I've never understood why aux busses seem to take such a huge toll on processing power?

I can have a huge template, but adding even just a few auxes just slams the performance meter and slows things to molasses.

Because they interrupt the ability for the pre-gen system to work. Nothing on an AUX can be pre-gen'd.

I wish MOTU killed this Pre-gen nonsense. For what I can see, it creates more problems than it resolves, it forces you to work their way, and for the few people that it works, the performance improvement is not that spectacular.

I mean, just glancing at the board's topics and complaints, it is starting to remind me of DP6...

[HCMarkus]

I have found pre-gem allows me to keep piling VIs on while working to picture. There are audible glitches, but all is well when the buffer is increased to 1024 for mixing. This said, a global switch allowing pre-gem to be tuned on and off would probably be a really good thing.

[ccrane]

Wanted to add to my earlier post - I believe what was slowing down my sequence were instances of Ozone 5. When I removed those, the endless spinning beachballs went away.

Oddly enough, opening some of the O5 plug-in windows in the problematic chunk seemed to eliminate the CPU spikes, even if the O5 windows were subsequently closed. The CPU spikes would come back upon restart of the audio engine however. Pre-gen on/off had no effect.

Most of the issues I have now seem to be in regard to the SE visually being delayed.
The cursor response is not as instantaneous as in earlier versions of DP.

One example is a slight delay when mousing around within the SE. Click dragging around a selection to zoom in produces unexpected results because I am moving too fast for DP 9.13 to register properly. This is driving me a little crazy. DP 8 on the same machine is much 'snappier' in this regard.

I should add that I work exclusively in the SE window (a-la ProTools) and have all tracks set to display. Additionally, I use the consolidated window with a few channels of the mixing board visible on the left panel (set to automatically scroll to the selected SE track) and the chunks window visible in the right panel. It's actually a nice little setup.

I also have a tech link open in regards to the SE wiper and movie window sometimes starting a second or so after the audio starts. The larger the CPU load, the greater the lag. This only happens in the SE window and if any window other than the SE is the active window, the lag goes away - i.e the SE wiper moves instantaneously with the audio. Not super annoying but wondering if the graphic issues I'm having are inter-related.

Additionally, some automation recording issues are happening but I'll wait till I hear back from my MOTU tech link before I elaborate.

MOTU tech support has been very responsive.

-Chris

Mac Pro mid 2012 2x6core
10.12.4

DP 9.13 STRESS TEST

I just installed DP 9.13 AND 9.02 on my Mac. DP 8.13 is also on this Mac.

As I have some DP projects that require a buffer of 1024 in order to playback properly, I was concerned with DP 9.13’s performance on these projects given that I can not raise the buffer any higher than 1028. Here are the results of my tests.

COMPUTER: 2012 Mac Pro 5,1 2 x 2.4Ghz 6 Core Xeon, 12 GB Ram
OS: Sierra 10.12.4
DP Plasma Theme

DP SEQ FILE SIZE: 14 MB
DP SEQ RAM USEAGE: 3.80-4 GB (with about 4GB system RAM to spare)

PLUG-INS IN PROJECT: WAVES, KUSH, PSP, IZOTOPE, XFER RECORDS, KEILWERTH, SPL, EVENTIDE, MDA, SOUNDTOYS, SUGARBYTES

VIs IN PROJECT: VPS, REFX, PAPEN, SYNAPSE

TRACK COUNT: ABOUT 150 (mostly audio and auxes)

TRACK’S BUSSING/ROUTING: Most tracks are bussed to one of five auxes (set A), those five auxes are then further bussed to either one of two aux inputs (set B). Finally, those two auxes are then bussed to the input of an Audio track where the Final Mix is recorded.

BUFFER: 1024 for all DP versions (max my system will allow)


RESULTS:

DP 8.07:
DP Processing Meter: 95%
Performance: Not exactly snappy but works.
CPU Usage in Apple’s Activity Monitor: Around 26%

DP 9.02:
DP Processing Meter: 90%
CPU Usage in Apple’s Activity Monitor: Around 26%
Performance: Similar to 8.13, not snappy but works.


DP 9.13:
DP Processing Meter: 80%
CPU Usage in Apple’s Activity Monitor: Around 25%

Performance: Plays, but barely.
Selecting with mouse is extremely sluggish, 5 sec or more spinning beachball for anything, including something as simple as changing the cursor type.

STEPS TAKEN TO HELP DP 9.13 BETTER PLAY BACK SEQUENCE:

1) Used Load feature to import into empty DP 9 sequence.
Result: NO PERCEPTIBLE CHANGE

2) Increased prime seconds from 125 to to 500.
Result: NO PERCEPTIBLE CHANGE

3) Deleted unused takes.
Result: NO PERCEPTIBLE CHANGE

4) Deleted all plug-ins from Master Fader.
Result: NO PERCEPTIBLE CHANGE

5) Routed ALL tracks to MASTER FADER OUT, removing all aux bussing in sequence:
Result: SLIGHT IMPROVEMENT
Still sluggish but can change curser type and scroll through input/output lists much faster. Playback is still not as smooth as DP 8.13.

6) Rerouted one CPU intensive reverb (Eventide Blackhole - or a similarly CPU demanding reverb) directly to MASTER FADER OUT:
Result: SLIGHT IMPROVEMENT
Still sluggish but can change curser type and scroll through input/output lists much faster.

CONCLUSIONS BASED ON THIS ONE TEST:

1) If you have a project that previously ran at your maximum buffer setting in a version of DP prior to 9.13, your sequence may be unable to play properly in DP 9.13.
Previous to DP 9.13, you could double the Host Buffer Multiplier in order to slightly increase performance. That feature is no longer available in 9.13.

2) As I have noticed in previous versions of DP, extensive bussing comes at a cost.
Bussing auxes to additional auxes, especially if there are intensive reverb plug-ins involved, appears to greatly increase the strain on DP.

3) Unexpectedly, the load on the CPU appears to be slightly less in DP 9.13 even though performance seems to indicate the opposite of that. MOTU tech support previously suggested doubling the buffer setting in DP 9.13 which seems to support the likelihood of increased CPU load. Not sure why DP’s and Apple’s metering suggests otherwise. Maybe there is something on my system that is skewing those particular readings.

4) As usual, Apple’s Activity Monitor shows much less strain than DP’s Processing Meter. I recently read that DP, Logic and Pro Tools are all close to each other in how many plug-ins can be run so one might assume they would also exhibit the same lower than expected Activity Monitor CPU readings - which leads me to:

5) I may need a more powerful computer.

[bayswater]

My recollection, from first getting Ozone, is that it is intended to be used at the mastering stage, uses a lot of CPU, and iZotope recommended using it on 2 track mixes. Alloy, replaced by Neuton, was for track processing.

One instance of Ozone loads down my system, but does it with any DAW.

[ccrane]

Excellent point and thanks for sharing that. I think it's also likely an incompatibility with Ozone 5, an old plug-in that I was lucky to have run at all in Sierra. As mentioned, I could make the spikes go away, but only until the next session restart. Also, the same session runs ok in DP 8.13.

My recollection, from first getting Ozone, is that it is intended to be used at the mastering stage, uses a lot of CPU, and iZotope recommended using it on 2 track mixes. Alloy, replaced by Neuton, was for track processing.

One instance of Ozone loads down my system, but does it with any DAW.

[waxman]

I've never understood why aux busses seem to take such a huge toll on processing power?

I can have a huge template, but adding even just a few auxes just slams the performance meter and slows things to molasses.

Because they interrupt the ability for the pre-gen system to work. Nothing on an AUX can be pre-gen'd.

Do all DAW's have a slow down with Auxes? PT, Logic, Studio One etc... any better then another?

[towerproductions]

Well I am definitely seem to be getting some slowness with the latest DP9.13 with saving and drawing mod info etc. and beachballs occurring for 5-7 seconds constantly . Not a real heavy load with only 5 VI instances on my machine and the processor is hardly moving . I didn't seem to get this with earlier versions .

Just got off the phone with MOTU and was told this is somewhat normal and there is not much difference from 9.12 . I was also told to try enabling and disabling various instruments which I did . Seems to be a little worse with Falcon enabled but I never used to have these issues with Falcon and DP . I tried enabling Falcon in real time as well . This get's pretty frustrating especially working with clients.

How is everyone else's response time Beachballs etc. with DP 9.13 and VIs or any issues with the latest Falcon?