Euphonix DP Update

[superjeezus]

i also have BPM and did notice some issues when changing certain parameters in the VI.

Well I think BPM has its own issues with DP. With or without Eucon, the processor utilization is off the charts when BPM is in a DP session, especially when getting a few layers going.

Incidentally, I have been doing all of my work in Logic and BPM is great there. Barely a blip on Logic's CPU meter. In fact, everything is far more CPU-friendly in Logic. I couldn't believe it when I re-created my main starter template for Logic and worked through an entire project--from VI composition to tracking VI's to audio to mixdown and final bounce. Hardly any CPU usage at all, working at 128 buffer the whole time. Not one crash. I couldn't do the same in DP at 512.

Something is very wrong with DP's CPU utilization--with or without Eucon--and I sure hope they figure it out soon because I really miss a lot about it.

[bootsncats]

So.....

I was tracking at 16 tracks simultaneous recording. If I were doing 90 tracks in simultaneously I would use a different control surface for sure.

For mixing, on the other hand, I ended up with 86. The problems I had went away after the 6.02 update so its safe to assume my problems had nothing to do with the mc control.

I use the 4 faders (live) as my mains, center fills, monitors, and another track depending on the show.

I use MC Mix(s) to do the rest but keep those 4 assigned.

When mixing post I use those as Center, LR, LSRS, and LFE

When doing music I use those as my aux bus faders.

Heres the deal, I don't use the tiny OLED on any of my surfaces unless they are right near the fader. I go for the meter bridge on the screen and extend it toward the bottom of my monitors. 4-5 lines of display is good enough to label the tracks but not to monitor the levels.

Why I got it and use it opposed to any other surface:
- footprint: sucker is small as all get out for the functionality.
- portable: a lot better than hauling around a MCU
- The faders feel better than any others I have used
- Custom: I can make it work how I work and program to fit my workflow
- Simplicity on the far side of complexity: it is easy and fast to do common tasks that would usually take quite a few mouse clicks. I use the surface to get away from the keyboard, not the mouse.

there are others but you get the idea.

[mike_o]

I've never really gotten a full answer, so I'll ask here.

How is the eucon control for MAS plugins?

will it control all of DP's masterworks, fx, VI and utility plugins?

How in depth is it really? can you control the masterworks EQ smoothly from it?

dish the dirt guys. come on with it.

[sonus]

I've never really gotten a full answer, so I'll ask here.

How is the eucon control for MAS plugins?

will it control all of DP's masterworks, fx, VI and utility plugins?

How in depth is it really? can you control the masterworks EQ smoothly from it?

dish the dirt guys. come on with it.

Hi
I can answer about the MW EQ as well as most of my MAS or AU plug-ins , which you can fully control from the MC Mix (that's what I use) .
Haven't used it with VIs yet though.
BTW one very obvious thing that is missing from the Eucon- DP implementation, is the ability to move to previous / next marker wit the PREV and NEXT transport buttons. RTZ don't seem to work either. Don't know why this happens though as I think these should be quite easy to implement .

[bootsncats]

I've never really gotten a full answer, so I'll ask here.

How is the eucon control for MAS plugins?

will it control all of DP's masterworks, fx, VI and utility plugins?

How in depth is it really? can you control the masterworks EQ smoothly from it?

dish the dirt guys. come on with it.

Hi
I can answer about the MW EQ as well as most of my MAS or AU plug-ins , which you can fully control from the MC Mix (that's what I use) .
Haven't used it with VIs yet though.
BTW one very obvious thing that is missing from the Eucon- DP implementation, is the ability to move to previous / next marker wit the PREV and NEXT transport buttons. RTZ don't seem to work either. Don't know why this happens though as I think these should be quite easy to implement .

I noticed it worked in .4 but not in .5 I had them programed in custom but lost the workability.

[IO]

Just got my MC Control, and I gotta say I love it... this may be off topic but I have created touchscreen templates for eyetv, Peak, DSP Quattro, and some more... but the fact that you can control just about any software is really crazy... just wanted to show both sides, it was rough in the beginning… But im loving it now

[chaim]

http://www.motunation.com/forum/viewtop ... =1&t=37181

[James Steele]

http://www.motunation.com/forum/viewtop ... =1&t=37181

Someone wants to let you know that they're not loving it. Anybody else with these CPU hit issues?

[labman]

yes. it has been an issue for months, especially on any large projects. Euphonix does know this.

[chaim]

An observation I just want to point out is that DP has the feature of disabling tracks, so even though the tracks are there, they don't use much or any power. The mc mix, on the other hand, does see all tracks all the time. (well, so does the mackie control) so I thought that if at least the mc mix can also 'not see' the disabled tracks that would help.

[to clarify: the cpu hit happens in large sessions even if many tracks are disabled]

But even in small sessions it is clear in dp's cpu monitor that it adds a significant strain.

Also dp's cpu read out looks not so accurate against what's happening at the same time on the mac's activity monitor - cpu window.

On a buffer of 256 in dp, with Eucon enabled, dp's cpu hit is through the roofs. (not one VI enabled) While at the same time the activity Monitor's cpu window shows the same hit as if dp was at a 1024 buffer.

It might be more a dp related issue than euphonics, who knows, but it's bad.

[HCMarkus]

I stopped using DP's Performance Monitor long ago. The Apple Activity Monitor seems more accurate, and it shows me the activity on a per-processor basis. I have it running at all times as a floating window up in the corner. Whenever my machine acts up, a quick glance at the Activity Monitor usually tells me if I am experiencing a transient issue, or if a re-start is in order.

[giles117]

An observation I just want to point out is that DP has the feature of disabling tracks, so even though the tracks are there, they don't use much or any power. The mc mix, on the other hand, does see all tracks all the time. (well, so does the mackie control) so I thought that if at least the mc mix can also 'not see' the disabled tracks that would help.

Old Annoyance issue. I developed the habit of moving those tracks to then bottom of the list

[giles117]

I stopped using DP's Performance Monitor long ago. The Apple Activity Monitor seems more accurate, and it shows me the activity on a per-processor basis. I have it running at all times as a floating window up in the corner. Whenever my machine acts up, a quick glance at the Activity Monitor usually tells me if I am experiencing a transient issue, or if a re-start is in order.

iStat Menus CPU Monitor is useful as well. Sits in the MenuBar

[chaim]

Version 1.3.2 is out but no mention of a DP fix. Downloading now.

http://www.euphonix.com/artist/support/downloads.php

[labman]

Version 1.3.2 is out but no mention of a DP fix. Downloading now.

http://www.euphonix.com/artist/support/downloads.php

Great Chaim. Thanks for trying this out. Please let us know your findings!

Regards,
DLevy
mgr, Legacy Lab