Tiger/DP4.6 efficiency?
Moderator: James Steele
Forum rules
This forum is for seeking solutions to technical problems involving Digital Performer and/or plug-ins on MacOS, as well as feature requests, criticisms, comparison to other DAWs.
This forum is for seeking solutions to technical problems involving Digital Performer and/or plug-ins on MacOS, as well as feature requests, criticisms, comparison to other DAWs.
Tiger/DP4.6 efficiency?
Background: I just upgraded from Panther/DP 4.12 to Tiger/DP 4.6. My Waves v.5 Mastering Bundle remained the same. My computer is dual-processor G4 1.25 GHZ with 2GB of RAM.
Problem: Projects that used to run on the old system no longer run at all on the new system. Not sure what the culprit is... Tiger? DP4.6? Or maybe even Waves, but since I'm using the same version of that as before when it used to work, I guess I'm a little more suspicious of Tiger and DP4.6.
Questions: Has anyone else been experiencing fairly drastic reduction processing effeciency as they move up to newer software? Anyone found a solution other than reducing demands on the system or going back to previous software?
Problem: Projects that used to run on the old system no longer run at all on the new system. Not sure what the culprit is... Tiger? DP4.6? Or maybe even Waves, but since I'm using the same version of that as before when it used to work, I guess I'm a little more suspicious of Tiger and DP4.6.
Questions: Has anyone else been experiencing fairly drastic reduction processing effeciency as they move up to newer software? Anyone found a solution other than reducing demands on the system or going back to previous software?
- qo
- Posts: 873
- Joined: Sat Jan 22, 2005 10:01 pm
- Primary DAW OS: MacOS
- Location: San Jose, CA
- Contact:
Re: Tiger/DP4.6 efficiency?
Latest Tiger (10.4.2)? Apple improved Dashboard's CPU utilization in 10.4.2, but folks have mentioned using a utility called DashOff to disable Tiger's Dashboard.
What disk are you recording to? Has Spotlight finished it's initial indexing? I think there's an option in Spotlight to disable indexing of certain directory paths. You might want to exclude your audio drive(s) from being indexed.
Make sure unused items in Tiger's Sharing preference pane are disabled.
Have you made sure your buffer settings in DP match what you were using previously?
What disk are you recording to? Has Spotlight finished it's initial indexing? I think there's an option in Spotlight to disable indexing of certain directory paths. You might want to exclude your audio drive(s) from being indexed.
Make sure unused items in Tiger's Sharing preference pane are disabled.
Have you made sure your buffer settings in DP match what you were using previously?
Re: Tiger/DP4.6 efficiency?
yes latest version ... 10.4.2 ... Dashboard lasted about 2 min. before I figured out how to disable itLatest Tiger (10.4.2)? Apple improved Dashboard's CPU utilization in 10.4.2, but folks have mentioned using a utility called DashOff to disable Tiger's Dashboard.

The entire project is on a separate internal drive (playback only -- mastering/mixing session -- no recording happening). Indexing was allowed to run to completion before using system.What disk are you recording to? Has Spotlight finished it's initial indexing? I think there's an option in Spotlight to disable indexing of certain directory paths. You might want to exclude your audio drive(s) from being indexed.
ALL file sharing is turned off using the "System Preferences:Sharing" panel, if that's what you are getting at ... and there is no network access either.Make sure unused items in Tiger's Sharing preference pane are disabled.
I don't remember what they were originally under older version of DP ... but I didn't change them from the original installation default setting. I didn't make any changes to default start-up settings in the new version, until I encountered such problems, that I tried a larger buffer size, but it didn't make any difference other than make the program a little more sluggish or less responsive to input.Have you made sure your buffer settings in DP match what you were using previously?
- lampostudio
- Posts: 131
- Joined: Wed Jul 27, 2005 10:01 pm
- Primary DAW OS: MacOS
- Location: Harrisonburg, VA
- Contact:
Re: Tiger/DP4.6 efficiency?
I have to say I have been using DP on my 450 mg w/ 768 mg of ram G4 for years and never had the problem I am having with the "NEW & IMPROVED" versions.
I now have a dual 2.7 with 2 gig of ram and I am really hoping that these problems are just transitional.
I have 2 HD both 250gig I have the apps on one and all project on the other. Is that a bad thing for tiger? Should I drag the files on to the same HD the apps are on to work on them? Then store them on the 2nd HD?
I now have a dual 2.7 with 2 gig of ram and I am really hoping that these problems are just transitional.
I have 2 HD both 250gig I have the apps on one and all project on the other. Is that a bad thing for tiger? Should I drag the files on to the same HD the apps are on to work on them? Then store them on the 2nd HD?
- lampostudio
- Posts: 131
- Joined: Wed Jul 27, 2005 10:01 pm
- Primary DAW OS: MacOS
- Location: Harrisonburg, VA
- Contact:
Re: Tiger/DP4.6 efficiency?
I have a dual 2.7 with 2 gig of ram.
I have 2 HD's both 250gig I have the apps on one and all project on the other. Is that a bad thing for tiger? I'm running DP4.6
Should I drag the files on to the same HD the apps are on to work on them? Then store them on the 2nd HD? The reason I ask it seem to be running a little slower than I ecpected and is not able to handle too many UAD plugins at once.
I have 2 HD's both 250gig I have the apps on one and all project on the other. Is that a bad thing for tiger? I'm running DP4.6
Should I drag the files on to the same HD the apps are on to work on them? Then store them on the 2nd HD? The reason I ask it seem to be running a little slower than I ecpected and is not able to handle too many UAD plugins at once.
-
- Posts: 17
- Joined: Tue Mar 22, 2005 10:01 pm
- Primary DAW OS: MacOS
- Location: UK
Re: Tiger/DP4.6 efficiency?
Yea I've had afew problems with 4.6.
I'm running 10.4.2 (1.5 ghz G4 Powerbook with 2gb ram)and projects which still play fine in DP 4.5.2 tend to flash up "Disk too slow" messages in 4.6, although they do still continue to play the project if you click 'ignore'. I'm afraid I've nothing very scientific to add but it seems to me there may be an issue with 4.6.
Matt
I'm running 10.4.2 (1.5 ghz G4 Powerbook with 2gb ram)and projects which still play fine in DP 4.5.2 tend to flash up "Disk too slow" messages in 4.6, although they do still continue to play the project if you click 'ignore'. I'm afraid I've nothing very scientific to add but it seems to me there may be an issue with 4.6.
Matt
Re: Tiger/DP4.6 efficiency?
same here.Originally posted by Matt Mundesley:
Yea I've had afew problems with 4.6.
I'm running 10.4.2 (1.5 ghz G4 Powerbook with 2gb ram)and projects which still play fine in DP 4.5.2 tend to flash up "Disk too slow" messages in 4.6, although they do still continue to play the project if you click 'ignore'. I'm afraid I've nothing very scientific to add but it seems to me there may be an issue with 4.6.
Matt
- qo
- Posts: 873
- Joined: Sat Jan 22, 2005 10:01 pm
- Primary DAW OS: MacOS
- Location: San Jose, CA
- Contact:
Re: Tiger/DP4.6 efficiency?
Assuming both disks are the same (same performance numbers in Xbench for instance), then no, you shouldn't. The reason is that the Applications directory is (in default configurations) on the System disk. The System disk has a bunch of other processes that are writing to it randomly, and the swap file is there, so this is where RAM gets swapped out to.Originally posted by Lamp Post Studio:
Should I drag the files on to the same HD the apps are on to work on them?
You want your audio files (DP Projects) to live on the disk that no other processes are randomly accessing. So, yes, use the non-system disk.
Re: Tiger/DP4.6 efficiency?
When is Motu fixing DP4.6??? It runs more unstable under Tiger than the 4.52 previously.
It's always something... almost afraid to upgrade anything anymore. First it was Tascam FW1884, then Tiger, then UAD-1, now DP...

It's always something... almost afraid to upgrade anything anymore. First it was Tascam FW1884, then Tiger, then UAD-1, now DP...
