orangesporanges
Max Output Level: -84 dBFS
- Total Posts : 342
- Joined: 2007/02/22 16:13:05
- Status: offline
what do you see as the biggest bottleneck?
Just reassessing my system and wondering, what do you see as the biggest resource bottleneck for high stability, low latency, high track count recording? It can't be the processors , blazing fast, or RAM, where many of the users here use 12 gigs and up. So is it a hardware thing, poorly written drivers for hardware and plugins, etc.
I'm not experiencing any problems per se, just wondering your thoughts. Every time one of us gets a new system, "ahead of the curve" we all catch ourselves thinking, "there, I've got all the latest, greatest, nothing can stop me now" only to watch" ahead of the curve" become "industry standard " then "why is my system just chugging along." If you could point to 1 or 2 things ,what would they be?
Sonar Platinum, Windows 10 64bit, 3.4ghz i7CPU, 16gigs RAM, 1x 1TB SSD system drive 1 x 1TB HDD ( audio only)
|
bitflipper
01100010 01101001 01110100 01100110 01101100 01101
- Total Posts : 26036
- Joined: 2006/09/17 11:23:23
- Location: Everett, WA USA
- Status: offline
Re: what do you see as the biggest bottleneck?
2015/08/05 10:33:24
(permalink)
☄ Helpfulby Mitch_I 2015/08/05 11:29:43
The biggest bottleneck is software inefficiency. Developers assume everybody's got fast CPUs and gobs of memory, and as a result place less emphasis these days on code optimization.
Back when programs had to fit into 64KB and run on a single CPU at 25MHz, a whole lot more time was spent making sure no CPU cycles were wasted and RAM got returned to the pool when it was no longer needed. Nowadays, it's all about rushing releases out and worrying about optimization later. Memory leaks are so commonplace in all software, including the O/S, that we just take it for granted that computers need to be periodically rebooted - or we just go out and buy a few more GB's.
A DAW user can get the equivalent of a CPU upgrade by simply being choosy about what software to buy, based on efficiency. Fabfilter and Meldaproduction make up the bulk of my third-party plugins, and a big part of that decision is based on how well-optimized they are. Kontakt is another favorite due to its maturity and tuneability.
I do tolerate a few dogs in my collection, but they've got to be awesome in other ways.
 All else is in doubt, so this is the truth I cling to. My Stuff
|
MachineClaw
Max Output Level: -68 dBFS
- Total Posts : 1116
- Joined: 2012/10/08 00:15:28
- Status: offline
Re: what do you see as the biggest bottleneck?
2015/08/05 11:32:15
(permalink)
know what you have, tweak and fix your work flow to optimize what you need.
I used to think having the biggest badest computer, all the plugins at my fingertips would make life easier and then my music would be better.
honestly, it's made things worse and production harder, and truthfully not fun.
the most fun I have and most productive I am is when I keep everything calm and simple. 4 to 8 tracks and just lean. there are days where I have 60 tracks and alternative takes of lots of tracks and it's messy but those are the days when I am usually going way out there and messing around.
If I really have an idea I want to work with keeping it to a few plugins and 4 tracks keeps me in the moment.
I also come from the ancient days of 4 track porta studios and reel-to-reel decks. You HAD to keep it simple, no matter how much equipment you had.
but it is fun to throw everything at the box and see the 32gb ram meter inching up and the latency spikes creep up but not have anything hit the limit or choke and just say YES I AM A GOD!. though that doesn't really happen much, honest. no really, I don't do that, no, not at all. hahahahahaha.
|
MachineClaw
Max Output Level: -68 dBFS
- Total Posts : 1116
- Joined: 2012/10/08 00:15:28
- Status: offline
Re: what do you see as the biggest bottleneck?
2015/08/05 12:22:36
(permalink)
Bottlenecks.
CPU - fast is better, multi core helps.
RAM - as much as possible. samples eat up ram, more tracks can eat more. more ram is better.
Hard drives - more/fast as you can get um. SSD is really fast but still expensive.
good audio interface - better more reliable the better, company with good drivers/support will help.
money and time available to tweak and fix these will be up to the individual.
|
orangesporanges
Max Output Level: -84 dBFS
- Total Posts : 342
- Joined: 2007/02/22 16:13:05
- Status: offline
Re: what do you see as the biggest bottleneck?
2015/08/05 13:27:32
(permalink)
As far as software goes , I always suspected that. some plugins are absolute hogs, and some are not , yet the difference in sound is only slight, and not necessarily better.
Claw, you seem to be suggesting that I am the biggest bottleneck in my system. I already knew that, I guess. I was hoping that someone would chime in and say "in the current state of the art in OS design and implementation, Brand xxxx's xxxx (CPU, motherboard,USB3 hub, HDD, etc.) is clearly the only one that optimizes the environment it runs in, blah blah blah...". Bit definitely alluded to that with the Fabfilter and Meldaproduction plugs, I will have to look into those.( I HAVE liked what I see and hear in Fabfilter's products)
Sonar Platinum, Windows 10 64bit, 3.4ghz i7CPU, 16gigs RAM, 1x 1TB SSD system drive 1 x 1TB HDD ( audio only)
|
mettelus
Max Output Level: -22 dBFS
- Total Posts : 5321
- Joined: 2005/08/05 03:19:25
- Location: Maryland, USA
- Status: offline
Re: what do you see as the biggest bottleneck?
2015/08/05 15:03:18
(permalink)
Bitflipper's point is a huge one. Years ago when I programmed for fun, a guy who helped me often said I should be a programmer, since I thought of resources and dynamically allocated/released memory. He said "Most programmers these days rely on excessive resources, and the result has made them sloppy." (and that was in 1997!). Interestingly, this is the same reasoning I admired CW from day one (Guitar Tracks way back when), since regardless of resources, smooth playback must be met. "Sloppy" rears its ugly head in a heartbeat.
I still retain my old-school mentality when doing things in SONAR, meaning that I will bounce/commit FX and "dumb down" the CPU load religiously when I can. SONAR is a host, and if loads of non-efficient plugins are piled into it, the cumulative effect can be noticeable. SONAR tends to be everyone's whipping boy, but is powerless to overcome a poorly scripted effect. Some FX are "CPU-intensive" as is, and admit to this... and I often read into that as "can only really use one, or bounce it."
ASUS ROG Maximus X Hero (Wi-Fi AC), i7-8700k, 16GB RAM, GTX-1070Ti, Win 10 Pro, Saffire PRO 24 DSP, A-300 PRO, plus numerous gadgets and gizmos that make or manipulate sound in some way.
|