Performance

Discussion of Digital Performer use, optimization, tips and techniques on Windows.

Moderator: James Steele

Forum rules
This forum is for most discussion related to the use and optimization of Digital Performer [Windows] and plug-ins as well as tips and techniques. It is NOT for troubleshooting technical issues, complaints, feature requests, or "Comparative DAW 101."
Post Reply
User avatar
blueslash
Posts: 39
Joined: Thu Dec 04, 2014 8:12 pm
Primary DAW OS: Windows
Location: Hamilton, Ontario
Contact:

Performance

Post by blueslash »

Just curious what others get.

When mixing, and I have the 828mk3 plugged in, I'm usually pushing the cpu and redlining getting spurts and sputters during playback. Very annoying.

Same session booted without the 828 and using the internal audio card my cpu sits around 25-50% and runs smooth as silk. I get the odd jump but playback is fine.

Just seems backwards :-P
User avatar
MIDI Life Crisis
Posts: 26254
Joined: Wed May 18, 2005 10:01 pm
Primary DAW OS: MacOS
Contact:

Re: Performance

Post by MIDI Life Crisis »

What's in the mix? VIs? Audio and MIDI? A combination of all those? I'd need to know more about the specific sequences that are problematic, plug ins used (VI and otherwise) and the developers of those plugs.

How you distribute your data and resources makes all the difference. Unfortunately, it is NOT as intuitive a process that one might expect and not completely set out in the manual AFAIK, but on a multi-core machine there are methods to ease the CPU strain.

If you can answer a few of the questions above, you might get some surprising answers here.
2013 Mac Pro 32GB RAM

OSX 10.14.6; DP 10; Track 16; Finale 26, iPad Pro, et al

MIDI LIFE CRISIS
User avatar
terrybritton
Posts: 1117
Joined: Thu Jun 04, 2015 8:45 am
Primary DAW OS: Windows
Location: Elizabeth City, NC
Contact:

Re: Performance

Post by terrybritton »

For mixing you likely do not require as low a latency setting on that as you would have for tracking. I set mine to 1024 (and even 2048 at times) to take all the load off the CPU that I can.

The lower the latency (buffer) setting, the harder the CPU has to work to ensure the buffer has content in it when needed, since the buffer is so small and is used up so quickly in that scenario. A low buffer setting takes CPU power away from mixing tasks such as rendering plugins in real-time and such, so the plugins max out the CPU more easily since there was a much lower ceiling to begin with.

Terry
Computer: Sweetwater CS400v7 Intel Core i7-10700K CPU @ 3.80GHz | 64Gigs RAM | Windows 11 Pro x64 |
MOTU 828 mk3 hybrid

DAWs & Live: MOTU Digital Performer 11.31 | Cantabile Performer 4
Keyboard Synths: Kawai K5000s, Korg Wavestation
Controllers: NI Komplete Kontrol S-88 Mk3 & S-49 Mk2; Maschine Mk3 & JAM;
Akai MPK249 & 225, Alesis QX49, Behringer BCF2000 & FCB1010
Rack Modules: Ensoniq ESQm, Yamaha TX81Z, Wavestation SR

Tutorials: https://youtube.com/@CreatorsMediaTools
User avatar
MIDI Life Crisis
Posts: 26254
Joined: Wed May 18, 2005 10:01 pm
Primary DAW OS: MacOS
Contact:

Re: Performance

Post by MIDI Life Crisis »

Thanks, Terri. I wasn't even thinking of that as it seems so obvious. My "duh!"
2013 Mac Pro 32GB RAM

OSX 10.14.6; DP 10; Track 16; Finale 26, iPad Pro, et al

MIDI LIFE CRISIS
User avatar
blueslash
Posts: 39
Joined: Thu Dec 04, 2014 8:12 pm
Primary DAW OS: Windows
Location: Hamilton, Ontario
Contact:

Re: Performance

Post by blueslash »

Sorry guys, I'm a idiot. Didn't have my buffer up. Must of had it down during some MIDI tracking and forgot to bump it up again.

Smooth as silk with either the 828 or internal audio card.

This was just using audio (I print my VIs to leave as much cpu and ram for mixing), but I was getting the same result with or without VI's.

Thanks for unclogging my brain :-)
User avatar
blueslash
Posts: 39
Joined: Thu Dec 04, 2014 8:12 pm
Primary DAW OS: Windows
Location: Hamilton, Ontario
Contact:

Re: Performance

Post by blueslash »

@Terry ...

I can only go to 1024, is that a ram thing? R U on a desktop with 32G's of ram?

Just curious.
User avatar
HCMarkus
Posts: 9712
Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2006 9:01 am
Primary DAW OS: MacOS
Location: Rancho Bohemia, California
Contact:

Re: Performance

Post by HCMarkus »

You can use the "Host Buffer Multiplier" to get higher buffer values if you need them, but there comes a point, likely at the 1024 mark, of greatly diminished return.
User avatar
terrybritton
Posts: 1117
Joined: Thu Jun 04, 2015 8:45 am
Primary DAW OS: Windows
Location: Elizabeth City, NC
Contact:

Re: Performance

Post by terrybritton »

HCMarkus wrote:You can use the "Host Buffer Multiplier" to get higher buffer values if you need them, but there comes a point, likely at the 1024 mark, of greatly diminished return.
Yeah, I agree with that - pushing it higher has rarely fixed many things. 1024 is fine!

(BTW - I do not only use DP, and this holds true across them all, pretty much.)

Terry
Computer: Sweetwater CS400v7 Intel Core i7-10700K CPU @ 3.80GHz | 64Gigs RAM | Windows 11 Pro x64 |
MOTU 828 mk3 hybrid

DAWs & Live: MOTU Digital Performer 11.31 | Cantabile Performer 4
Keyboard Synths: Kawai K5000s, Korg Wavestation
Controllers: NI Komplete Kontrol S-88 Mk3 & S-49 Mk2; Maschine Mk3 & JAM;
Akai MPK249 & 225, Alesis QX49, Behringer BCF2000 & FCB1010
Rack Modules: Ensoniq ESQm, Yamaha TX81Z, Wavestation SR

Tutorials: https://youtube.com/@CreatorsMediaTools
User avatar
HCMarkus
Posts: 9712
Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2006 9:01 am
Primary DAW OS: MacOS
Location: Rancho Bohemia, California
Contact:

Re: Performance

Post by HCMarkus »

One interesting thing I've noted with DP9.12 is that, at least for parts that don't require super rhythmic precision, I can actually record VIs while using the 1024 buffer without unusable delay. This has been a lifesaver when needing to add parts well into a current scoring project. I have also been able to open and play really large projects with a 256 buffer (albeit with clicks and pops galore) and overdub precise parts successfully before reverting to the big buffer for mixing. DP has been handling it all while playing back HD video on my second monitor while DP monopolizes my 4k screen. Maybe the new AMD RX460 GPU is helping here. Regardless, overall, 9.12 has been working really well for me.

I'm between "emergency projects" today, so will be de- and re-installing DP to see if, per MOTU's suggestion, that will fix the MIDI sustain pedal issue encountered when recording over old MIDI data.
HC Markus
M1 Mac Studio Ultra • 64GB RAM • 828es • macOS 13.6.4 • DP 11.31
User avatar
blueslash
Posts: 39
Joined: Thu Dec 04, 2014 8:12 pm
Primary DAW OS: Windows
Location: Hamilton, Ontario
Contact:

Re: Performance

Post by blueslash »

Hmmm, went to try the "Host Buffer Multiplier" but it's not there. I guess that answers that :-P

All is good at 1024 anyway :-)
User avatar
kelldammit
Posts: 1012
Joined: Sun May 22, 2005 10:01 pm
Primary DAW OS: Windows
Location: right behind you!
Contact:

Re: Performance

Post by kelldammit »

if memory serves host buffer multiplier is a mac thing. it's not in the pc version that i can recall ever seeing.
Feed the children! Preferably to starving wild animals.
ASUS 2.5ghz i7 laptop, 32Gb RAM, win10 x64, RME Babyface, Akai MPK-61, Some Plugins, Guitars and Stuff, Lava Lamps.
Post Reply