Recommendation request: G5 not strong enough!

[Rush909]

I have been noticing a trent in my current ITB setup... not enough horsepower to get the job done... everthing in the box is great but I seem to not be able to finish a project without having to do the slugginsh, slow dance with DP as I get closer and closer to completetion...

since freezing is not an option (let's not even go there) it seems that I have to get onboard the UAD or powercore bandwagon.

what's everyone's recommendation... do's and don't, what to be carefull off... any pitfalls with either option I have above or is there another solution...

thanks for any feedback...

r.

[duncan]

I use a Yamaha 01V96 digital mixer (around $2K). It has EQ and compressors on every channel, plus 4 effects. I still use Waves Ren Vox and some other plugs, but the majority of the work is being done by the mixer, so my 1.8 dual G5 runs fines. Plus, with a mixer you can set up 4 seperate monitor mixes with the 4 assignable analog outs - essential if you're tracking a band. For mixdown I send the mix via SPDIF to a PC to burn CD's and also send it back into DP via ADAT lightpipe and a 2408, so I can have a 24 bit master. I also use an ADAT HD24 for tracking bands, and then transfer the tracks into DP for editing and mixdown, but that's another story.
I guess it all comes down to how much you like working with a mouse, and whether or not you can use the 12 mic preamps and the monitor mix capability.

[Labonza]

Originally posted by Rush909:


what's everyone's recommendation... do's and don't, what to be carefull off... any pitfalls with either option I have above or is there another solution..
r.

How much RAM do you have? Which model of G5?

Have you taken any steps to optimize the OS for audio work? There was a pretty extensive list of recommended settings posted here recently.

[Rush909]

hm... good point... here are my specs

G5 2x2
2GIG Ram
OSX 10.3.8
DP 4.5

Only use this for music, nothing else... DP is great... never crashes, but I am just wondering if I am asking too much from my system, and the current state of DP (sluggishness factor)

15 Virtual Synths, EQ/FX on about 40 Channels... Mostly Waves Stuff (which is more of a Hog than DP stuff)... 24bit/44.1 projects.. I regularly remove unused soundbites, and flush undo history... CPU Hovers around 60% when not rolling and during playback jumps to 95ish/clips during heavy passages... again my MAIN gripe is that even when not engaged, DP is very sluggish just becuase of the sheer about of plugs/synths loaded... I can get around the spikes maybe by freezing (argh!) but working on the project with even 60% CPU and current load is no fun at all...

anyone else got these kind of projects and does not get DP getting sluggish on them and slowing down?

r.

[doodles]

very similar, but on a dual 2.5. your 15 vi synths will be the killer, i'd reckon. i'm cool on my set-up, and also do 21/44.

[kwiz]

Virtual synths suck up a lot of CPU power. I don't know what your freeze issue is but you could just record the synth tracks to audio tracks and then delete the VI's, do a "save as" and mix from there.
The lack of VI's at that point should free up some CPU headroom.
DP4.6 allows you to save some CPU power by using the V rack as well. Are you putting f/x like reverb on several tracks?
If so, group the tracks that are using the same f/x to an aux channel. That will allow you to use less instances of certain plugins which will save you some more CPU headroom. You should be able to have run 40 plus heavily effected tracks with the machine you have with no problem. A UAD-1 card could help, but even that can be maxed out easily if you're not economical enough when using those f/x. If you are doing all the things that I've just mentioned and are still having low track count/sluggish issue's, then you need to get your machine checked out. I once mixed a 52 track project that was heavily effected on a G4 dual 800 w/1gig of ram in OS9 using 1 processor. (Some of my f/x didn't support dual processor machines at that time) It was sluggish as hell, but I pulled it off.

[Archer]

Your expectations are too high...

Using VI's implies you have a fairly low buffer setting, which means you CPU is working hard. On top of that you have 40 tracks with EQ/FX which, again means hard work....

Freeze you VI's, use a buffer setting of 128/256. Increase it to 1024 when mixing. If you have many tracks, try increasing the disk read/write size...The getting started guide provides info on this.

Greetings

[daveyboy]

yeah, freezing, or submixing them all to one stereo track. Either way it just takes one pass through the song to do.Then do a "save as" and delete the vi's. I agree with it being a pain. I try not to freeze stuff if I can help it.

[Rush909]

thanks for the responses... I guess I hate doing steps that interrupt my workflow (such as freezing/bouncing tracks).. I would rather spend the money on a UAD-1 card than dealing with performance issues... and yes I always put fx such as reverbs/delays on auxes... mainly only compress and Eq seperate tracks..

My biggest problem is the VI... I have done much bigger projects on single 867 machine but with all external synths... so yes bouncing them would make things faster, but requires more work if I start changing arrangment.. and since when I am done with the main mix, I usually do a radio and Dub mixes both requiring tons of arrangment changes it's not a great option for me...

so... presuming I want to go down the UAD-1 route... Any major Bugs/unresolved issues that will make including this into my setup a problem.

thanks again for all the feedback!

r.

[Jaysplace101]

I'm with you r. I just like to have everything at my fingertips until the very end. In case I decide to change a sound 3/4 of the way into an arrangement or something. I've got the same exact setup as you except I have 3.5 gig of ram and a UAD-1 card. The UAD definitely helps, and I would recommend it just because the plugs are so great. Couldn't live without them now. But, I honestly don't think it will give you the boost you need. It doesn't for me, and from what I read, you work a lot the same as me. For me, I'm building an arrangement with sounds, and I keep changing it till the end to get it just right. It's a pain to have to commit to something, and the frustrating part is I feel it limiting me so often cause I think, "well, I better not add another synth, especially not Atmosphere" because I know it's gonna kill my CPU!" So, it ends up having a negative effect on my production. If latencey wasn't double what it used to be on OS9, things would be a LOT better, but for me, even a 512 buffer with VI's is almost unworkable.

Anyway, to summarize, I'd get a UAD-1 card plus a bit more ram and it will get you closer..... but not there.

I'd love to hear from more dual 2.5 and dual 2.7 G5 users, and see how they're doing with VI counts.

j

[obmit]

Even with a UAD you are in trouble. Why not put your synths on another computer? Get a cheap PC, a good soundcard and forte or vstack. Not only will your G5 be more responsive, DP will save and open much quicker. If money is no problem and you hate PC's get another G5 and run VI's on it!

Obmit

[David Polich]

Second computer for VI's is TOTALLY the way to go. All my VI's are on a separate PC.

I agree with the above replies - you're asking too much of your G5, running that many VI's. Arturia's minimoog V alone sucks up about 25% CPU. Combine all tbhose VI's with plug-ins and you're out of luck.

[Kubi]

I agree that a 2nd machine would probably be your best bet. I would think it'd be much better than a UAD card or similar. Get a PC with GIGA and a few PC softsynths, then you can have the best of both worlds...

But short of that, I recommend recording the VI's as audio tracks. I prefer recording to bouncing, since I am always amazed at how many little things I discover that need fixing when listening to a solo'ed track from top to bottom. But whether you freeze or record, here's the trick:

DON'T TRASH the Instrument track, and of course also not the corresponding MIDI track. Just mute them, throw them below the master fader, and keep them in the sequence. (Or in the new V-Stacks. Just mute them. That's all.)

Thanks to the wonderful DCPUM feature, they don't take up any CPU and, if they're softsynths and not samplers, hardly any RAM. This way, it literally takes only three mouseclicks to get the old track back up if you want to make a quick change (one click to mute the audio track, two to play-enable the old VI track and its MIDI track).

If you keep the volume and pan etc. on the original tracks untouched (I use automation on every MIDI track and ALWAYS leave the VI fader at 0dB) you can even punch in into the old audio track without any problems. Then mute the Instrument track and MIDI track again and keep them around for later.

I also make a new take for every new corrected version of the MIDI track and the printed audio track, so if you want to come back to what you had before, it's right there waiting for you.

You'll be amazed at how many tracks you'll end up being able to work with, with as much flexibility as you'd have with all virtual tracks. Only cost: the time it takes to freeze/print. So until you can afford two machines, this is not a bad solution.

<small>[ July 11, 2005, 02:19 PM: Message edited by: Kubi ]</small>

[tim57var]

Here's another vote for V-Stack. Put it on another PC and you'll be happy!! No sync to tempo, though! I run Mach 5, Ivory and Stylus RMX on the mac, and everything else on the PC. It's one extra step to save, but well worth it. UAD card is a help as well.

[Rush909]

Originally posted by Jayman:
It's a pain to have to commit to something, and the frustrating part is I feel it limiting me so often cause I think, "well, I better not add another synth, especially not Atmosphere" because I know it's gonna kill my CPU!" So, it ends up having a negative effect on my production.

that is the main reason I'm looking for a solution... my production is suffering cause I'm hitting the ceiling way too soon... Even though my processor can handle it (let's say I'm hovering around 90%) DP's sluggishness makes me not want to add anymore FX/EQs/VI cause it will make things EVEN SLOWER!... so I'll investigate the dual Machines thing as it would be Ideal in terms of keeping DP's slugginesh to a minimum...

if DP would just implement a non-realtime freeze function like in Logic, we'd all be laughing! you can freeze a track in a 5 min song is less than 10 sec!

thanks for the feedback...

r.