Jump to content
Bren Gun

Question About Performance

Recommended Posts

Hi. One of my last prime motivators to like Samplitude, and to help me in making a decison, is how it performs regarding its use of resources. I've used SONAR before and, while it's nice, it's a bit bloated it seems, and gives me dropouts while it shouldn't, which is the reason I move away from it. On the other hand, using something like REAPER amazed me in this regard, as it was extremely stable and fast, but its lack of notation turns me off.

Where would Samplitude fit in here on the scale of efficiency and stability (bugs?) according to objective tests?

(What I experienced so far with the demo is that I did notice performance problems (clicks) when doing simple actions like muting and soloing while playback is active. It occasionally crashed as well. And I have the impression third-party DX and VST effects aren't functioning efficiently.)

Thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Bren,

objective tests aren't existing. I suggest that you rely on your own findings. I guess that what you experience on your system is very typical for your working environment and nothing can replace that experience.

That does not mean any allegations to the potential sources of your obvious issues. I just want to say that you should use what works best for you. If features, performance or stability are the most important points for you should be left to your decision.

Regards,

Sebastian

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the reply, Sebastian. It seems you are correct about the situation, as it would be difficult duplicating mine. However, if one would set up a machine and thoroughly test a few DAWs, including Samplitude, with the same objective standards and actions, I think a decent measurement could be found.

Regarding Samp, there are still some issues not entirely clear to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi Bren,

objective tests aren't existing. I suggest that you rely on your own findings. I guess that what you experience on your system is very typical for your working environment and nothing can replace that experience.

That does not mean any allegations to the potential sources of your obvious issues. I just want to say that you should use what works best for you. If features, performance or stability are the most important points for you should be left to your decision.

Regards,

Sebastian

Yeah, it's entirely relative to your system, your approach, etc.

Sonar and Nuendo have always performed in a much more 'bloated' fashion on my system, and as well I found it took me twice as long to get anything done, or to even get into a good flow with them. Others may disagree.

You should just really go 'on the attack' with Samplitude for a while, and push it to see what it can really do.

Hang out here for a while, and many of the veterans and developers will be here for support - which is 'half the battle'.

Greg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi. One of my last prime motivators to like Samplitude, and to help me in making a decison, is how it performs regarding its use of resources. I've used SONAR before and, while it's nice, it's a bit bloated it seems, and gives me dropouts while it shouldn't, which is the reason I move away from it. On the other hand, using something like REAPER amazed me in this regard, as it was extremely stable and fast, but its lack of notation turns me off.

Where would Samplitude fit in here on the scale of efficiency and stability (bugs?) according to objective tests?

(What I experienced so far with the demo is that I did notice performance problems (clicks) when doing simple actions like muting and soloing while playback is active. It occasionally crashed as well. And I have the impression third-party DX and VST effects aren't functioning efficiently.)

Thanks.

Samp have many ways of streamlining resource-efficency according to needs and tasks at hand. Nothing I ever tried ever comes close when it comes to numbers of plugins and fx with large track-numbers & mixing. (Samp was kinda slow with getting multi-cpu-support, and I remember a test-project with heavy plugs; getting as many plugs in Samp spending one core, as maxing out two cores with Nuendo!)

First off, you must choose the right engine (press "Y") - Personally I always prefer economy-engine's track-fx mode. As it uses the vip-buffer, giving great headroom for the cpu. For some, live fx in busses & auxes are important, and they choose Hybrid engine, but then there's only the asio-buffer for the cpu.

And then again there's having all kinds of variation-possibilities with the different buffer-settings..

Can be a daunting task, but pays off in the end IMO.

Regarding DX/VST third party, I never had problems. Some very few plugs report wrong latency, but that can be fixed with a manual force latency value. When that is said, I havent used dx-versions for a couple of years, as they are not automatically latency-compensated.

Maybe good to mention specifically those you have trouble with - someone might know if there's any known issues, (although I've never heard of any.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi Bren,

objective tests aren't existing. I suggest that you rely on your own findings. I guess that what you experience on your system is very typical for your working environment and nothing can replace that experience.

That does not mean any allegations to the potential sources of your obvious issues. I just want to say that you should use what works best for you. If features, performance or stability are the most important points for you should be left to your decision.

Regards,

Sebastian

Yeah, it's entirely relative to your system, your approach, etc.

Sonar and Nuendo have always performed in a much more 'bloated' fashion on my system, and as well I found it took me twice as long to get anything done, or to even get into a good flow with them. Others may disagree.

You should just really go 'on the attack' with Samplitude for a while, and push it to see what it can really do.

Hang out here for a while, and many of the veterans and developers will be here for support - which is 'half the battle'.

Greg

Yes, I think I will go more "on the offence". I think that in this battle, in time, Samplitude will be forced to capitulate to me :) Actually, I think it already is losing the battle as my accustomization is getting greater all the time. Generally the GUI doesn't bother me as much as it did, except at some times the countless (popup) menus overloaded with entries. I still find this a bit too much options making it more difficult to quickly find one. But it's not that big a problem for me.

That said, I'm really starting to like Samplitude now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi. One of my last prime motivators to like Samplitude, and to help me in making a decison, is how it performs regarding its use of resources. I've used SONAR before and, while it's nice, it's a bit bloated it seems, and gives me dropouts while it shouldn't, which is the reason I move away from it. On the other hand, using something like REAPER amazed me in this regard, as it was extremely stable and fast, but its lack of notation turns me off.

Where would Samplitude fit in here on the scale of efficiency and stability (bugs?) according to objective tests?

(What I experienced so far with the demo is that I did notice performance problems (clicks) when doing simple actions like muting and soloing while playback is active. It occasionally crashed as well. And I have the impression third-party DX and VST effects aren't functioning efficiently.)

Thanks.

Samp have many ways of streamlining resource-efficency according to needs and tasks at hand. Nothing I ever tried ever comes close when it comes to numbers of plugins and fx with large track-numbers & mixing. (Samp was kinda slow with getting multi-cpu-support, and I remember a test-project with heavy plugs; getting as many plugs in Samp spending one core, as maxing out two cores with Nuendo!)

First off, you must choose the right engine (press "Y") - Personally I always prefer economy-engine's track-fx mode. As it uses the vip-buffer, giving great headroom for the cpu. For some, live fx in busses & auxes are important, and they choose Hybrid engine, but then there's only the asio-buffer for the cpu.

And then again there's having all kinds of variation-possibilities with the different buffer-settings..

Can be a daunting task, but pays off in the end IMO.

Regarding DX/VST third party, I never had problems. Some very few plugs report wrong latency, but that can be fixed with a manual force latency value. When that is said, I havent used dx-versions for a couple of years, as they are not automatically latency-compensated.

Maybe good to mention specifically those you have trouble with - someone might know if there's any known issues, (although I've never heard of any.)

This engine thing of Samplitude is a bit unclear. I don't really record audio all that much and I don't use live effects on it. I mostly have use for audio manipulation in the box, MIDI, VST instruments, mixing, using plugins, and such. I reckon the Economy mode with HW input monitoring fits this. What would you say? And what would you say about buffer sizes?

(I have more or less followed what I know and what I read separately from the engine descriptions.)

EDIT: either that engine mode, or Hybrid with HW.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi. One of my last prime motivators to like Samplitude, and to help me in making a decison, is how it performs regarding its use of resources. I've used SONAR before and, while it's nice, it's a bit bloated it seems, and gives me dropouts while it shouldn't, which is the reason I move away from it. On the other hand, using something like REAPER amazed me in this regard, as it was extremely stable and fast, but its lack of notation turns me off.

Where would Samplitude fit in here on the scale of efficiency and stability (bugs?) according to objective tests?

(What I experienced so far with the demo is that I did notice performance problems (clicks) when doing simple actions like muting and soloing while playback is active. It occasionally crashed as well. And I have the impression third-party DX and VST effects aren't functioning efficiently.)

Thanks.

Samp have many ways of streamlining resource-efficency according to needs and tasks at hand. Nothing I ever tried ever comes close when it comes to numbers of plugins and fx with large track-numbers & mixing. (Samp was kinda slow with getting multi-cpu-support, and I remember a test-project with heavy plugs; getting as many plugs in Samp spending one core, as maxing out two cores with Nuendo!)

First off, you must choose the right engine (press "Y") - Personally I always prefer economy-engine's track-fx mode. As it uses the vip-buffer, giving great headroom for the cpu. For some, live fx in busses & auxes are important, and they choose Hybrid engine, but then there's only the asio-buffer for the cpu.

And then again there's having all kinds of variation-possibilities with the different buffer-settings..

Can be a daunting task, but pays off in the end IMO.

Regarding DX/VST third party, I never had problems. Some very few plugs report wrong latency, but that can be fixed with a manual force latency value. When that is said, I havent used dx-versions for a couple of years, as they are not automatically latency-compensated.

Maybe good to mention specifically those you have trouble with - someone might know if there's any known issues, (although I've never heard of any.)

This engine thing of Samplitude is a bit unclear. I don't really record audio all that much and I don't use live effects on it. I mostly have use for audio manipulation in the box, MIDI, VST instruments, mixing, using plugins, and such. I reckon the Economy mode with HW input monitoring fits this. What would you say? And what would you say about buffer sizes?

(I have more or less followed what I know and what I read separately from the engine descriptions.)

EDIT: either that engine mode, or Hybrid with HW.

I use hybrid engine a lot nowadays.

I recommend you just open the help files and search under 'engine' or 'buffer', and read what comes up there.

Greg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't really record audio all that much and I don't use live effects on it. I mostly have use for audio manipulation in the box, MIDI, VST instruments, mixing, using plugins, and such. I reckon the Economy mode with HW input monitoring fits this. What would you say? And what would you say about buffer sizes?

(I have more or less followed what I know and what I read separately from the engine descriptions.)

EDIT: either that engine mode, or Hybrid with HW.

I've always needed to monitor live input, so I've never used anything but eco-engine software monitoring (no live fx- but monitoring through software) or trackFX monitoring - with track FX in additon.

I use a lot of high latency plugs, and Hybrid always goes to its knees way faster, so its not for me.

Sorry I cant be of more help, but to me it sounds like "plain" software monitoring could do the trick for you..

(can you monitor vsti's properly with hardware monitoring? - I dont even know)

Regarding buffers, its hard to say without some knowledge about your system (fast&new/older&slow? - what audioCard/driver etc etc ) For some, snappyness of mixer & playback controls are more important than cpu-overhead.

(then you need lower vip-buffers) For me (coming from the analog world of tape machines - no snappyness there :) ), I care more about cpu-overhead and keep my vip buffers between 2k & 4k)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the replies, guys.

Alright, I've probably been playing too much with Samplitude. Now I'm simply getting confused about the engine thing to the point I just don't know anymore! Can you explain to me the overall difference between the two (Economy & Hybrid), and then the different modes that operate with them? And why should one use a particular setting? What are exactly the advantages and disadvantages regarding sound quality? I also understand Hybrid uses two engines in one, and Economy is only Economy.

Maybe it's my fatigue, but I find the descriptions in the program and in the downloaded manual "vague" (, and the site tells even less but sounds more like marketing). In the program options itself (at the selection slider), it mentions one particular factor (or more), but then doesn't mention it/them in another description of another mode and how it/they is/are affected, which makes it harder to judge. So I just look at the table.

I made a screenshot for quick reference here:

sampenginemodehx9.jpg

I was hastily under the impression that by 'Track input' and 'HW' is meant whether you monitor your incoming audio directly from the audio device, or if you'd want Samplitude to send it if you don't have direct monitoring on your device. Maybe my impression is wrong, but this is why I quickly took to Economy 2nd mode or Hybrid 1st mode, because I monitor directly from the device. 'VSTi input' is ASIO either way. That leaves 'Track/VSTi' and 'Busses/Master' to consider. If I understand correctly, Hybrid 1st mode gives me lower latency at the cost of CPU, and Economy 2nd mode will give me generally higher latency, but reduces CPU load (and the VIP buffer must be greater)?

So far, for what I've done (record a bit, monitor directly from device, little mixing, automation, some plugins), I haven't noticed any noticeable difference between these two modes, and I don't know how it would affect my MIDI (yet) but I reckon not so much. I also don't know the influence on sound quality (other than possible pops and glitches, if resources are too much strained). Armed with these thoughts, at the moment I suppose Economy 2nd mode fits me well, but I am very much interested in what you have to say.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry, I've been confusing you..

I've been with samp since v7(or v6 really), and never changed my settings here, I simply forgot they've taken away "plain software monitoring" in v10.

You should be fine with vsti's and 2nd economy if that input-monitoring is ok with you. Else you choose third. (And you get control/fx possibilty/routability with the input signal in Samp's mixer too.)

There is no sound differences with any of these choices. Its all about FX-use & routing of live inputs and response in controls & mixer. (Same great audio-engine at work in all of them.)

If you can "afford" to just have the asio-buffer for your PC, you could go Hybrid. If not (like me), choose economy, and everything(but inputs) is run through the vip-buffer first, giving additional headroom for cpu-calculations. it will affect controls & give a slightly slower response. BUT - Monitoring of inputs/vsti's is still just the asio-buffer (like in hybrid), it is just the playback tracks/objects that are vip-buffered.

IOW I can do a overdub very late in a mix, running maybe with 80% cpu-usage, still with 64samples latency of the monitored signal. Quite amazing really. I love those vip-buffers :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For recording VSTi, you have to use at least TrackFX monitoring to hear the VSTi in realtime when playing with your keyboard.

The special thing about TrackFX monitoring is that other already MIDI-recorded VSTis on other tracks can be set to non-monitoring, using less CPU power then.

For mixing with best cpu economy, use peakmeter monitoring. All VSTi will be calculated with large VIP buffers then. In this mode, VSTi cannot be monitored if playback is stopped - for editing Notes in the MIDI editor, it might be handy to have the "audition notes" feature working, so as long as your computer has enough CPU power, I suggest to stick to hybrid mixer monitoring.

BTW the soon coming V10.1 update will include further multi-core optimizations, also for VSTi usage.

Greetings,

Frank

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...