CPU spikes

[arthur24]

Hi. I like MSI very much except for the fact that my Powermac G5 1.8 ghz singleprocessor with 2.5 GB of ram cant catch up on my demands.

I have an orchestra set up with about 20 instruments playing.

And I would probably need at least 5 more to simulate an entire orchestra.

Remember that pizz and arco are different voices as well as spiccato and marcato strings.

So I have the choice of bying a new Quad Mac which very soon will be old because of Apple introducing Intel-processors in the new Powermacs.

I wonder if there is any good hardware synth on the market which sounds acceptable for orchestral stuff. I used to work with Proteus 2, Roland U110 and so on. But after the introduction of software syntezisers these old machines doesnt feel satisfying in there sounds.

I think hardware synths has many advantages compared to software synths. There is no loading time -- I need to work "live" and cant use freezing because of compositional changes all the time.

So which is the way to go-- bying a Yamaha Motif or a new computer to put it straight ? Any advices are appreciated.

PS I have a LXP-1 and 828mkII at the moment too.

[cyrral]

I've also noticed CPU spikes on my PC system. I'm running Sonar 5, only 6 - 16bit 44.1khz audio tracks, and five MSI 1.1.1 instruments.

This is all running on an IBM Intellistation Dual 2.2Ghz Xeon workstation, with 2GB of RAM, several HDs spinning at 7200rpm. All running through a Mackie Onyx board with the Firewire card.

There's no antivirus or antispy running in the background.

Yet, as soon as I load MSI into Sonar the CPU jumps from 8% up to 33% and can spike out at 80% quite often.

With adjustments to buffers, it has helped, but the playback still has clitches from time to time. I've even noticed this when running MSI as stand alone. The CPU even spikes through the ceiling then.

I do have a Mac G4 dual 1.25, with Logic 7.2 loaded. I would be curious to see what type of performance it has in OSX vs XP Professional.

Anybody out there willing to make some suggestions on why MSI is such a CPU-hungry plug-in, and explain why it still is with the new version that is supposed to have disk-spooling?

Thanks

[MT Groove]

How much processing does MSI uses? It seems it is VERY CPU intensive. I'm running DP 4.6 on OS 10.3.9 on a G4 Dual 1.25 with 1 gig of ram. I open a blank new session, add MSI with nothing else load one instrument, turn on the reverb and it's already spiking the CPU. This is at 256 buffer. So a G4 dual 1.25 is not fast enough to run MSI efficiently? I could up the buffer but the latency is killing me.

[motumacman]

turn off the reverb.. the reverb eats up alot of CPU power

[cyrral]

Yep, when I turned off the reverb, the CPU usage dropped dramatically on both the PC and the Dual G4. That's a shame, since MOTU highly tauts the convolution reverb. If you can't use it until you're ready to render/freeze the track, then it seems somewhat convoluted. Pun intended.

I want to definitely keep using MSI, because I really do enjoy the instruments library. But it's hard to get use to not being able to use one of its nicest features while I'm orchestrating.

Any additional suggestions would be greatly appreciated. For either PC or Mac.

PC = Dual Xeon 2.2Ghz, 2GB RAM, 74GB 15k HD, Mackie Onyx w/Firewire, Sonar 5, Reason 3, Sound Forge 8, MSI 1.1.1.
Mac = Dual G4 1.25Ghz, 1.25GB RAM, 160GB 7200 HD, Mackie Onyx w/Firewire, Logic 7.1, Reason 3, Peak 4.14, MSI 1.1.1.

[MT Groove]

Another thing I notice about MSI on my system: It seems if I open MSI, turn on the reverb (which defaults to Concert Hall) and then load instruments, it runs ok and don't spike. However, if I change the reverb type, the meter immediately goes straight to the Red and I get massive dropouts. Then Even if I change back to the Concert Hall reverb, it's still pegged to the red. Anyone else experiencing this on their system, or is it only mine doing that?

BTW, playing MSI w/o the reverb is nowhere near as fun.

[motumacman]

The reverb does eat up processor cycles but i am able to keep the reverb on and work... i guess you gotta get a monster of a machine.. these VI's are no joke now adays...

[David Stephen Baker]

I don't understand why running Verb on MSI drains CPU so drasticaly, Altiverb uses similar programming and doesn't drain CPU nearly as much even at extremely long reverb times.

The system requirements listed for MSI do not even come close to what my G4 1.5Ghz is running and yet I can't even have a 2.5 second decay time without CPU spikes and artifacts.

Seems like false advertising to me.

Is an MSI update coming soon that will manage convolution reverb more efficently?

Does anybody on this thread work for MOTU?

[philcastillo]

I've noticed that if I load MSI patches into MachFive it is much easier on the CPU than running the MSI plugin. So I just bypass the plugin and use MachFive and my own reverb.

[mhschmieder]

I've only got a G4 iMac, so unfortunately I can't use the highly reputed convolution reverb in MSI either. I will be upgrading to a G5 after Leopard is released (hopefully by September).

In the meantime, I ALSO get CPU spikes from highly dynamic parts such as acoustic piano, UNLESS I attenuate that part's level by 12-18 dB or so.

I'm guessing that the lack of resolution of DP's meters disguises a lot of overload situations on high-resolution instruments such as MSI, and that a traditional VU meter plug-in would help, but simply attenuating the output of MSI should also help eliminate many of the CPU spikes.

I should add that I also have to mono-sum the MSI output on MOST of my current projects as I'm doing a lot of audio backing tracks for stage use and those are dual mono (with click track in the left channel).

Once I start using MSI and MX4 on some of my originals, I may encounter different problems altogether running in full stereo mode .

[David Stephen Baker]

In the meantime, I ALSO get CPU spikes from highly dynamic parts such as acoustic piano, UNLESS I attenuate that part's level by 12-18 dB or so.

I translate this as saying, "Turn down the MSI output." I don't grasp how changing the volume of a part changes the amount of processing required to play the part.

I'll give it a shot, but I still don't see why a 1.5GHZ machine can't crunch the numbers when they spec WAY less and other software can pull it off. I'll post a letter I sent to MOTU next...

-Dave

[David Stephen Baker]

Letter to MOTU as promised:

I have yet to hear back.

Hey Guys/Gals,

First let me say, I love the additions you made on DP5. I can't wait for my copy to arrive! Your attention to the needs of the production community are commendable.

Secondly, I purchased M.S.I. A week ago primarily due to the quality of the included reverb and samples I previewed on your website and have been sorely disappointed at the amount of CPU usage the convolution reverbs drain even at extremely low decay times. Performance spikes seem to occur without reason, several knobs seem to latch to the mouse pointer regardless of the window in the foreground, and all of this seems to happen regardless of the number of instruments loaded.

I have read the included literature and have inquired on several list servers about "work arounds" and have been told that convolution reverbs are a notorious drain on CPU's and to increase my hardware buffer to latency causing levels. All this seems quite unacceptable to me considering other reverbs such as Altiverb use similar principles with better quality and less CPU drain.

My question: Is there anything in the works that will provide an upgrade to deal with this problem in the near future? Or would it make more sense for me to return MSI for Mach5 and a different orchestral library?

OS 10.3.9
1.5G processor 17" Powerbook
1.5G Ram
DP 4.6.1
MSI 1.1.1
Via 828mkII

[springuy]

i really had fun reading your post here...
You must be kidding : you're comparing Altiverb, a convolution reverb that costs from 495 $ to 895 $ depending on the format you need to a multi-format orchestral plug-in that cost half to third the price of this reverb AND, for this small price, OFFERS/includes a convolution reverb...

Next, you'll find bananas too expensive compared to oranges?

Keep it serious please.

Thank you.

If the included reverb doesn't suit your needs use Altiverb, Space designer or whatever reverb you want...

[David Stephen Baker]

i really had fun reading your post here...
You must be kidding : you're comparing Altiverb, a convolution reverb that costs from 495 $ to 895 $ depending on the format you need to a multi-format orchestral plug-in that cost half to third the price of this reverb AND, for this small price,
Keep it serious please.
.

I don't recall mentioning price at all. I was comparing function. I have used Altiverb and read the literature on both products.

I simply don't understand why MOTU is selling a product and glorifying it's Convolution reverb which WILL NOT FUNCTION on the size machines they have specified.

I do not understand why it WILL NOT FUNCTION when other software using similar principles DO... like altiverb. I understand that Altiverb is a more expensive plug and is not a VI, but it is doing more complicated math with 1/3 the CPU drain. This does not add up to me.

By the by, thanks for the attitude. It really brighetend up my morning. When I don't have something helpful to say I don't post. At the very least I READ what I am commenting on.

-Dave

[cyrral]

I have always found it interesting the attitudes of some of the forum members. Call me old fashion, but I always thought that a forum is where you state your ideas, questions, concerns, and hopefully get responsible conversation and answers to most of your inquiries.

Why is it that some people treat it as a platform to boost their position, their concepts, their agenda and try to shut down the whole concept of what a forum is all about. It ends up turning into a political battle of the power of wills.

It always puts a smile on my face when I'm hear the sales person at Guitar Center telling about he mixed on a $5000 set of speakers, and anybody who is serious about recording needs to spend $5000 on a set of monitors. I feel that for most people, beginners to professional, the bottom line is, what is the best solution for what I can afford. Will it meet my needs, will it perform to level of quality I hope for, based on how much I can invest.

Since there are so many options nowadays on finding that solution, every body's has their take on what is the best solution. If it works for them, then it must work for every one else. But, unfortunately that just isn't true.

Couldn't we get back to posting out scenarios, and giving our suggestions and insight, based on a conception of building camaraderie and sharing, not by belittling and criticizing each others opinions. That way, real information is available to those who need it most.

Anybody feel like a group hug??? I know! I know! Just shutup, right?