Perfomance Feedback from Strike

[The Dougfather]

Hi all,

im just looking to get some feedback on how the strike plugin behaves with various Pro Tools systems in terms of buffer errors and CPU usage. Im using an iMac G5 1.8 with 1.5GB Ram which should be ok but i'd just let to get an idea of how people are finding it's performance before i take the plunge, particulary single processor machines. I normally find digi plugins a fairly safe bet but I've been stung with some duff third party plugins in the past so if anybody can help it would be greatly appreciated.

I tried posting in the Mac LE forum and no joy.

Thanks in advance

[Light Wing]

Works GREAT for me on a single processor P4 3.2GHz & 2GB RAM

[bortraws]

It is heavy on the cpu load, but not as heavy as BFD for instance. At this time i'm using a G5 DP 1.8 GHz with 2.5 GB RAM and PT 7.3 LE with a Digi 002R. You start to get the dreaded H/W Buffer Size messages when you use one or more other heavy plugins together with Strike. Like a convolution reverb or a guitar amp simulator plugin. Especially with 128 samples latency during recording. The problem is that it has those cpu spikes every now and then. My cpu load would be at a third of the bar but it would still give me the messages due to a cpu spike (little green stripe that triggers the red). When mixing (1024 samples H/W Buffer size) it is absolutely fabulous.

Strike sounds fantastic though and has a lot of tweakabily with great ease of use. The way i use it is i record (midi) or program my drums the way i like them and then bounce them to tracks (audio). It costs me voices, but at least i have plenty of cpu power left for all my eq's, delays et cetera. I usually do the same thing with other heavy plugins. I deactivate the tracks so i can always go back and tweak something if it's not 'sitting' right in the mix.

Besides the few quirks (read bugs) that Strike has — it doesn't work very well yet with meters other than 4/4 — It's still worth every penny. And we're only at version 1.0. So i have high hopes that an update will soon make it king of the Virtual Drum plugin world. (my humble opinion).

Hope this story is of any help.

Good luck,

[CME]

I'm using it with the computer spec'd below. I have all the samples at max quality, and use mainly it's own internal fx with no problems. The only external effect I use is a bus send to TL Space for some very nice room verb. However I tend to track at 256-512 buffer size with low-latency monitoring on, and move to 1024 for mixing. It's rare I go any lower, but it does seam to handle 128 and even 64 fairly well. I would have to take it out of high resolution mode and turn off some of my more cpu intense plugs to get dependable service out of it at 64-128 buffer sizes, but I think it would handle it. In all honesty I've been really pleased with it's overall efficiency.

[bortraws]

That's what a new Mac Pro with Intel processors does for you.

I'm waiting for Mac Expo next week with money burning a hole in my hand.
Hopefully they'll speed bump the Mac Pro's.

Who knows, maybe they'll amaze us with a new 8 core mac using 2 of Intel's new quad core chips.
Now imagine running Pro Tools on that.

[CME]

If you ment my machine, it's still the PowerPC Mac, just the last generation. I haven't seen an unreal increase in power with the Intel versions, but they are still real new and are definately more powerful. Give them some time and they will be incredible, especially if they go 8-core as expected. At least as soon as programmers figure out how to access all that muscle. That seems to be why the new machines aren't a lot more powerful than the last G5's.

[bortraws]

Ah yes. I read it wrongly. It is a Power Mac. My Bad.

Probably wishful thinking.

Mac Pro, Mac Pro, Mac Pro ... I see 4 core chips jumping over fences in my sleep. Pretty pathetic i know.

But seriously, i did see a huge speed increase when i installed Pro Tools on a Mac Pro Dual DuoCore 2.66GHz of a friend of mine. Man was that thing fast. And the amount of plugins that he can run is way more than i can do now with my dual core PM. Imagine what an 8 core machine could do.

Making Pro Tools a true 64-bit program won't make it that much faster though. It will only be allow it to address more RAM. So we would only really benefit with sampler plugins and romplers.

Anyway, time will tell ...

3 days, 22 hours, 13 minutes and 25 seconds to go till Macworld ...
3 days 22 hours, 13 minutes and 20 seconds to go till Macworld ...
3 days 22 ...

[CME]

I realize the Intel Macs are definately more machine, but there wasn't a huge gain over the PPC quad in PTLE. And on the GAS (gear acquisition syndrome) front I understand. I just bought a Mesa Stiletto Ace and am now just dreaming of a Mac Pro. I was seriously considering making the jump when the 8-core version became available, but really I don't more power right now. I was just planning ahead. So I guess I'll wait and see what's around when I really start maxing my current system. With rumors rampant of a new "003" I'll wait and see what and if it is, then wait for the "003 Pro", and finally the "003 mini". Maybe by the time the dust has settled I'll upgrade my interface and computer all at once.