MOTUnation.com

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

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.

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

Thanks, Terri. I wasn't even thinking of that as it seems so obvious. My "duh!"

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

@Terry ...

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

Just curious.

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.

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

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.

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

All is good at 1024 anyway

if memory serves host buffer multiplier is a mac thing. it's not in the pc version that i can recall ever seeing.