Avid Pro Audio Community

Avid Pro Audio Community

How to Join & Post  •  Community Terms of Use  •  Help Us Help You

Knowledge Base Search  •  Community Search  •  Learn & Support


Avid Home Page

Go Back   Avid Pro Audio Community > Legacy Products > Pro Tools TDM Systems (Mac)

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1  
Old 06-30-2011, 04:02 AM
suicune suicune is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Wolverhampton, UK
Posts: 896
Default Higher DSP usage in PT9?

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.
__________________
M2 Studios
Wolverhampton, UK
http://www.madhat.co.uk
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 06-30-2011, 04:12 AM
Bushpig Bushpig is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 599
Default Re: Higher DSP usage in PT9?

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
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 06-30-2011, 04:25 AM
suicune suicune is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Wolverhampton, UK
Posts: 896
Default Re: Higher DSP usage in PT9?

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
__________________
M2 Studios
Wolverhampton, UK
http://www.madhat.co.uk
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 06-30-2011, 04:43 AM
drumster drumster is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Canada
Posts: 463
Default Re: Higher DSP usage in PT9?

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.
__________________
Lynx Hilo Thunderbolt
2013 Retina Macbook Pro 2.7 16 GB of RAM
PTHD 11.3.1 OSX 10.10.1
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 06-30-2011, 04:57 AM
tonwurm's Avatar
tonwurm tonwurm is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: europe
Posts: 745
Default Re: Higher DSP usage in PT9?

Quote:
Originally Posted by drumster View Post
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
__________________
Mac Pro 2010: PT10 HD3 on Mavericks, PT12 Ultimate 2020.3 on High Sierra, Logic X, DP 7, VEPro

MacBook Pro: Logic X, Mainstage
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 06-30-2011, 01:17 PM
ericsvizeny ericsvizeny is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: PA
Posts: 251
Default Re: Higher DSP usage in PT9?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bushpig View Post
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
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 07-05-2011, 01:04 AM
Bushpig Bushpig is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 599
Default Re: Higher DSP usage in PT9?

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
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 07-05-2011, 04:16 AM
suicune suicune is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Wolverhampton, UK
Posts: 896
Default Re: Higher DSP usage in PT9?

Quote:
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.
__________________
M2 Studios
Wolverhampton, UK
http://www.madhat.co.uk
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 07-05-2011, 08:21 AM
Bushpig Bushpig is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 599
Default Re: Higher DSP usage in PT9?

Suicune,

Quote:
....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).

Quote:
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
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 07-05-2011, 09:30 AM
suicune suicune is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Wolverhampton, UK
Posts: 896
Default Re: Higher DSP usage in PT9?

Quote:
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
__________________
M2 Studios
Wolverhampton, UK
http://www.madhat.co.uk
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
What would normal disk usage considered to be in the usage window? Digitopian 003, Mbox 2, Digi 002, original Mbox, Digi 001 (Mac) 7 09-08-2009 09:50 PM
7.4 RTAS Usage meter higher than normal! Any thought's? HELP TREXROCK 003, Mbox 2, Digi 002, original Mbox, Digi 001 (Win) 3 11-26-2007 12:37 PM
Help understanding CPU Usage, RAM, Disk Usage... Bezo 003, Mbox 2, Digi 002, original Mbox, Digi 001 (Mac) 12 02-03-2006 07:41 PM
HTDM not showing CPU usage in the system usage Brandonx1 Pro Tools TDM Systems (Win) 3 12-19-2004 09:45 AM
Anyone use JAM v.2.6 with OS 9.1 or higher?? peter parker 003, Mbox 2, Digi 002, original Mbox, Digi 001 (Mac) 3 11-21-2002 09:38 AM


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 12:28 AM.


Powered by: vBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Limited. Forum Hosted By: URLJet.com