Horrible VI performance when recording in 2019.10!

[AlexLakis]

I can't figure out if musicians that can't track at 96k/256 buffer are really good musicians or really bad ones (no complaints here!)

[TNM]

Originally Posted by AlexLakis

I can't figure out if musicians that can't track at 96k/256 buffer are really good musicians or really bad ones (no complaints here!)

256 buffer at 96K is acceptable for playing VI's and external instruments.. Many vocalists would be ok but some might complain of flanging. It depends how fast the interface drivers are too of course..

256 at 96K is a LOT different to 256 at 44K.

[TNM]

Originally Posted by JFreak

I have never been using USB audio interface. Poorest cheap thing was FW 002R and the rest being HD/TB

You mentioned apogee and their FW ones were no faster than the USB, sorry to say.

[TNM]

Originally Posted by daeron80

Sorry to hear that. On Windows 10, I'm having excellent VI performance with 2019.10 - best ever. The only exception is when I activate Ozone 5 (which is pretty old, and that might be the problem) with a few instances of Arturia V Collection synths. No biggie. Freeze a couple tracks, and I'm rocking again. On orchestral tracks, I can run all the instances of Play and Spitfire stuff I could ever want, never a hitch.

That's windows. Works great here too on the same mac that OS X is on.

Because shortcuts are so easy to create on Mac, and I have a hundred of them for PT, is why I can't really fathom using windows instead.

For example, I have powerclaw shortcuts for tons of stuff like the page scrolling type and turning it on or off.. PT is the only DAW on the market that doesn't have a hotkey for page scrolling built in (true), and until recently, the only DAW that had to have playback stopped to change scrolling modes.

[TOM@METRO]

Originally Posted by daeron80

Sorry to hear that. On Windows 10, I'm having excellent VI performance with 2019.10 - best ever. The only exception is when I activate Ozone 5 (which is pretty old, and that might be the problem) with a few instances of Arturia V Collection synths. No biggie. Freeze a couple tracks, and I'm rocking again. On orchestral tracks, I can run all the instances of Play and Spitfire stuff I could ever want, never a hitch.

On Windows, VI performance is fine here as well.

[TNM]

Originally Posted by TOM@METRO

On Windows, VI performance is fine here as well.

What percentage can you take your real cpu usage too with plugins on PT windows?
I am about to test that on my 16" macbook in Bootcamp as soon as I can install some more plugins later on.
Considering the low buffer performance on windows is stellar, 64 buffer with asio and I can play any VI unlike 64 with core audio on OSX, I presume I'll be able to heavily load the system.
If only I could work out how to easily make my own shortcuts for those that don't exist.

[P_J]

>>I am about to test that on my 16" macbook in Bootcamp as soon as I can install some more plugins later on.<<

I have 16" MBP (2.4/5500M8Gb/64Gb) and on MacOS both Nuendo and Logic runs extremely well (no fan noise problems), but Pro Tools performance in Bootcamp is very disappointing. Fans are blowing loud all the time and there's no way to use low buffer settings. I'm really hoping this is just a Bootcamp thing, not a Pro Tools. I haven't test VI performance, just normal audio post production sessions.
EDIT: It seems that bad performance had something to do with hardware drivers. I bought U-Phoria UMC204HD for my "on the road" setup and with ASIO Drivers PT/Bootcamp is working very well even with small buffer sizes too. Fans are still blowing twice as fast as on Mac OS, but PT's performance is good.

[JFreak]

Originally Posted by TNM

You mentioned apogee and their FW ones were no faster than the USB, sorry to say.

Was commenting other user's experience of USB

[RyanC]

One thing I think that would REALLY help VI performance in PT is if there was an option for an additional 32 or 64 sample buffer for VI's as compared to input monitoring.

I would love to be able to get to 32 buffer for input monitoring plus 64 for VI's. Considering there is no input buffer or sample delay for AD converter on the VI side it really makes sense. No reason they should both try to use the same buffer size.

Hate to say it, but I wouldn't be surprised if optimizations to the native engine in PT will have to wait for HDX sales to be fully dead.