Higher DSP usage in PT9?

[suicune]

So I finally gave in last week and did the upgrade. No significant problems as of yet. But I started this week loading some pretty big sessions last saved in 8 and I'm getting insufficient system resources dialogs on almost all of them.

Does anyone know why PT9 might be using more TDM chips than PT8? My playback engine settings are the same. In the system usage dialog I'm seeing chips allocated to 'SurrLongDelys' where they used to say 'MixrLongDelys'. Is this just a different naming policy or is there actually something different in the delay compensation engine which could be causing this? I'm not using any surround channels, and I have DSP caching turned off. It's an HD2 PCIe system.

[Bushpig]

Hi S,

Maybe to do with having the Surround mixer plug in the plug ins folder?? Installs have traditionally defaulted to the Surround mixer (maybe with the Stereo as well, can't remember). I always switch them all out and have JUST the Stereo Dithered plug in there.

I'm interested in show stoppers like this (if it is a show stopper), as I've had a copy of PT9 waiting here since before Christmas, but haven't had a suitable break in proceedings to give my machines a full birthday and try PT9.

Let me know if that helps mate.

Cheers

Steve Bush
http://music180.com/pros/5887

[suicune]

Great that worked!! Got a whole chip back. It's odd cos I'm certain I never manually changed the mixers in PT8, but I must have been on stereo before. Perhaps there was an option I missed during install.

Cheers

[drumster]

The surround mixer plugin allows you to change the pan depth in Pro Tools. In versions previous to PT 9, the default setting was always 2.5 db but now it defaults to 3.0 db using the Surround plugin.

[tonwurm]

Originally Posted by drumster

The surround mixer plugin allows you to change the pan depth in Pro Tools. In versions previous to PT 9, the default setting was always 2.5 db but now it defaults to 3.0 db using the Surround plugin.

...and it allows to switch between different solo-modes

[ericsvizeny]

Originally Posted by Bushpig

Hi S,

Maybe to do with having the Surround mixer plug in the plug ins folder?? Installs have traditionally defaulted to the Surround mixer (maybe with the Stereo as well, can't remember). I always switch them all out and have JUST the Stereo Dithered plug in there.

I'm interested in show stoppers like this (if it is a show stopper), as I've had a copy of PT9 waiting here since before Christmas, but haven't had a suitable break in proceedings to give my machines a full birthday and try PT9.

Let me know if that helps mate.

Cheers

Steve Bush
http://music180.com/pros/5887

Hey,

I have upgraded my secondary studio computer to PT 9 and it is great! My TDM system is still on 8, but it's rock solid. I'd rather not take any chances! :)

- Eric

[Bushpig]

Guys,

Eric: Yeah, thanks for the thumbs up. I'm looking forward to trying PT9. Although it doesn't appear to offer much to HD users, but now that it's up to version 0.3, I'm gonna give it a go. I usually avoid .0 releases if I can help it and like you, my PT8 is running (pretty) good.

Suicune: I think the choice of mixer plug that gets installed must be related to that window choice you get on install that asks if you do "Midi, Mostly audio or Surround mixing" etc. Kinda like those automated cinema ticket booking lines that sell you a chick-flick when you're tryna book Diehard IX ?!?

Cheers all.

Steve Bush
http://music180.com/pros/5887

[suicune]

Suicune: I think the choice of mixer plug that gets installed must be related to that window choice you get on install that asks if you do "Midi, Mostly audio or Surround mixing" etc. Kinda like those automated cinema ticket booking lines that sell you a chick-flick when you're tryna book Diehard IX ?!?

Yeah I remember now, but unless I was really not paying attention during install that option has gone from PT9. I would hazard a guess Avid are encouraging the use of the surround mixer as default to provide all users with access to the variable pan depth. You can understand why, as inter-studio transfers could become an issue otherwise. It's just a shame that this option has taken an extra chip for delay compensation.

[Bushpig]

Suicune,

....but unless I was really not paying attention during install that option has gone from PT9

I had a feeling that might be the case. But still good to know that PT9 has the same "footprint" when only the stereo mixer is in use (opening old sessions etc).

I would hazard a guess Avid are encouraging the use of the surround mixer as default to provide all users with access to the variable pan depth. You can understand why, as inter-studio transfers could become an issue otherwise.

Possibly true, possibly true. I have been interested in trying the variable pan depth for a while now, but need to maintain some backwards compatibility for older sessions, so have just stuck with the stereo mixer. Finding out from yourself here that the surround mixer has a bigger DSP footprint was something that hadn't occurred to me to be honest, although if I'd thought about it, it seems it obviously would for reasons of multi-channel digital combining.

And this leads me on to pointing you in the direction of this thread below (if you haven't already seen it).

http://duc.avid.com/showthread.php?t=296384&page=6

Here I discuss why is it that PT doesn't use an advance reading of the EDL to compensate for plug-in delay. I won't bore you with it all here. I've jumped you in at page 6 in the link above, where I first pose the question.

Enjoy.

Cheers

Steve Bush
http://music180.com/pros/5887

[suicune]

And this leads me on to pointing you in the direction of this thread below (if you haven't already seen it).

http://duc.avid.com/showthread.php?t=296384&page=6

Here I discuss why is it that PT doesn't use an advance reading of the EDL to compensate for plug-in delay. I won't bore you with it all here. I've jumped you in at page 6 in the link above, where I first pose the question.

I hadn't really delved into that thread as I suspected it would just be a lot of raking over old coals, but since you've directed me specifically to that question I will say something on the subject.

I've used logic pretty extensively which does use track pre-delay to compensate for plugin delay, and I can tell you quite simply why PT's method is better despite its many flaws. Logic is COMPLETELY incapable of correctly time-aligining everything when delay-inducing plugins are used on auxiliaries or masters. You have to choose between either your playback being out (ie no ADC on auxes and masters) or your recorded audio being out of time, which is what happens when you switch ADC onto 'all'. I've had sessions that I was having to manually pre-delay recorded audio by as much as 50ms to keep everything in sync. I couldn't switch the ADC off because the track became impossible to play to.

That's not to say there isn't a better implementation of the pre-delay method if you'll allow me to call it that, but Logic's certainly sucks.

I know that's a bit off-topic for this thread, but what the hell, it's my thread