no multiprocessor support in the update :-(

well according to the blog...

"Multiprocessor support...well we talked about that one, and we know people want it...but it wasn't possible to do it in this update. It will definitely come up in discussions for the next update."

while they've added a bunch of great features this was the one thing i was hoping for. guess i'll have to wait as its not coming this time around.

The update was always Q1 2007. This slipped to April. Multiprocessor is on the cards for the following update, but hasnt been confirmed yet.

ORIGINAL: Rosco

Besides, I might have to wait till May before I get my grubby mitts on V2.5. In April I’m helping a friend sail a yacht from Sardinia to the Azores and then back to the UK. It’s a hard life, but some ones got to live it.

Rosco

Sucks to be you.

i think this topic needs to be discussed more. it seems to have just drifted by everyone's attention. so i'm going to bump this for you all.

no need to thank me, just fulfilling a self-appointed role.

ORIGINAL: fragmentated

well according to the blog...

"Multiprocessor support...well we talked about that one, and we know people want it...but it wasn't possible to do it in this update. It will definitely come up in discussions for the next update."

while they've added a bunch of great features this was the one thing i was hoping for. guess i'll have to wait as its not coming this time around.

Damn, (can I say that here?) I hadn't heard about this major cut back. That really sucks. Can't believe there hasn't been a major debate about this. Oh well I don't mind waiting another three years till V3.

ORIGINAL: DayDrumFour

Dou you think they had to cut out the multi-proc support in order to get input quantize working?

Smart move if they did.

Really! Are your playing and/or editing skills that bad? Personally I would rather have had the additional processing power to lower latency, (which should improve your timing), plus the benefits of more tracks without freezing etc. I'm sure this has been covered elsewhere...

Oh yes here it is...

http://forum.cakewalk.com/tm.asp?m=960713

I'm assuming you missed it, cos you didn't post anything in that thread DD4

Im all for having both in Project5. As for your anology IQ is very new in comparison to the evolution in music, we dont "need" either.

However given that the opposition has both, then wouldnt it be better if Project5 had both.

Oh dear. I was really just stirring the pot when I said that.

I'm pretty certain that this was not an either/or decision on Cake's part, given that IQ is something that I guess could be ported in a fairly straightforward manner from Sonar to P5 (basically once you've figured out the algorithm and where it fits in the code, it's an 'add-on'). I'm guessing that multi-proc support is a more fundamental thing that would require some clever code rewriting to the core of the application's engine.

For the record, I just don't see what people have against IQ; if you want it, use it. If you don't, then don't. Sometimes I've used it on my MPC, sometimes I don't. Typically when I use it, I have it on to quickly get some things down, and then go back and edit the note timing to make things less 'perfect'. My timing's not as good as I'd like from a drummer, so sometimes I use IQ. I don't feel bad about that; I'm not a great multi-instrumentalist (I can play the piano OKish, pretty awful on the bass, Stevie Wonder I most certainly am not), and I don't think I'll ever have time to become one. On the other hand tools like this help me write tunes. Just think about all the music written with analog step sequencers; you were lucky to get 4ppqn out of those, and yes there were lots of people back then who said it was killing music, and musicianship. Remember all those musician's union 'Keep music live' stickers? (I recall Human league had them stuck on the reels of their multitrack tape players they used on stage, cheeky devils). For me, I don't see the difference between using IQ and using any kind of sequencing with time correction. It's kind of funny that generally we don't hear the same kind of stink about post-recording quantize or audio snap.

Anyway, I am quite sure that this was not an either/or choice for P5 V2.5. One feature (IQ) is an add-on that I would imagine was largely picked up from another program from Cake's stable. The other (Multi-proc) is a more fundamental change; I doubt that checking the 'multi-processor support' option for the compiler is all that's required.

it will all be consumed in a massive revival of renaissance music performed on period instruments which drift badly out of tune and that have horrible acoustic properties, which will be the most profound way that children of the future will rebel against their parents' digital music.

i do think the whole lofi music scene (direct to 4-track cassette tape quality recordings) was largely a reaction to 1980's production techniques. in classical music there really has been a revival of old-fashioned instruments that have generally inferior performance characteristics because they have a certain "authenticity."

so i'm not misconstrued, there isn't any point here about input quantize or any other form of quantizing, chopping or editing, all of which seem like things that are not good or bad, but simply depend on how they're used.

If his computer was multiprocessor enabled, he would not have encountered buffering on his keyboard (latency) which impacts his feel for the keyboard and thus requires remedy

I couldn't help it

AXE