New "Mac Studio" from Apple

[Carl Lie]

Originally Posted by Phil O'Keefe

One other test I tried a few days ago was the Nexflix Sol Levante session. It was a total no-go. While I was able to load the session, I received an Out of CPU error message consistently immediately after I hit "play." This was true no matter what buffer setting I tried using.

It's results like this that have me holding back on any new Apple computer. I agree with Eric's suggestion and also wondering if it should be the first session played after starting up PT just to check if any memory issues from previous sessions aren't causing something.

C

[moogboy100]

Originally Posted by Phil O'Keefe

One other test I tried a few days ago was the Nexflix Sol Levante session. It was a total no-go. While I was able to load the session, I received an Out of CPU error message consistently immediately after I hit "play." This was true no matter what buffer setting I tried using.

Strange. It worked for PTE: https://youtu.be/MpBqLnJte6I

[diamondschwin]

Sol Levante works here fine at 64ms buffer on Mac Studio Ultra with HD Native. Computer has been great, Avid still has work to do to fix sluggish GUI, its better than my old 12 Core Trash Can but still not where I think it could obviously be. Seems the sluggish GUI is common no matter what system PT is running on at the moment.

[Actionmusic]

Base Ultra 64gb 1tb here, Sol Levante final PT mix session

opening on 2022.4 32 buffer 8gb disk cache odd peak 90% but averaging between 55-80% but plays
todays 2022.5 32 buffer 8gb cache looks more like 45-60% on PT system usage.

quite a boost, would be great to know if the resolved [PT-286348] Aux problem is responsible for the better CPU usage, or is it something else behind the hood for Silicon users?

My writing template also seems snappier just on first look, not many auxes on that

[Actionmusic]

Just tried a little CPU test for fun, 2022.5, Ultra 1tb 64gb 12.3.

I could run 89(!) stereo instances of Omnisphere each playing a 5 note chord, 1 chord per bar in a four bar loop using the “muted expectations” patch (arpeggio type/mid CPU usage patch) at a buffer of 32. Dynamic plugin processing on. 8gb disk cache (although no audio). No auxes in the session. 44.1 24bit

On 2022.4 it was a little less, around 85 instances, seemed on the meter to spike higher visually. same setup so not an aux change between .4 and .5. not sure why

for fun Logic X latest in rosetta mode ran 95 so not a great difference.

For Omnisphere owners the biggest eye opener was in my template i have Omni as an 8 part multi , with 8 instrument tracks going to one instance and recieving the seperate feeds for each channel. Putting Muted Expectations in each slot of the multi (ie 8 ) i could only get 2 instances of Omnisphere going at a buffer of 256 playing the same chord patterns.Meter was all bunched in the middle cores. I remember old advice from Spectrasonics that some systems core vs multicore to experiment with the instance vs multi setup but never would I have thought it such an extreme difference - 2 vs 89 !

[Marsdy]

Originally Posted by johnsimmons

Just tried a little CPU test for fun, 2022.5, Ultra 1tb 64gb 12.3.

I could run 89(!) stereo instances of Omnisphere each playing a 5 note chord, 1 chord per bar in a four bar loop using the “muted expectations” patch (arpeggio type/mid CPU usage patch) at a buffer of 32. Dynamic plugin processing on. 8gb disk cache (although no audio). No auxes in the session.

On 2022.4 it was a little less, around 85 instances, seemed on the meter to spike higher visually. same setup so not an aux change between .4 and .5. not sure why

for fun Logic X latest in rosetta mode ran 95 so not a great difference.

For Omnisphere owners the biggest eye opener was in my template i have Omni as an 8 part multi , with 8 instrument tracks going to one instance and recieving the seperate feeds for each channel. Putting Muted Expectations in each slot of the multi (ie 8 ) i could only get 2 instances of Omnisphere going at a buffer of 256 playing the same chord patterns.Meter was all bunched in the middle cores. I remember old advice from Spectrasonics that some systems core vs multicore to experiment with the instance vs multi setup but never would I have thought it such an extreme difference - 2 vs 89 !

That’s a big difference!

Pro Tools, as far as I understand it has two buffers. The buffer you can set which applies to record enabled/input monitored/MIDI thru enabled tracks and a separate, much higher playback buffer in the background.

I’m not 100% sure but I think a multitimbral VI routed to individual Instrument Tracks is always “live” i.e. using the lower user configurable buffer. A buffer of 32 is still quite low for VIs, even in 2022.

[Eric Lambert]

John - I get the feeling that they're making little improvements all over the place, even if the "What's Changed" text doesn't indicate much. I'm seeing small improvements related to things that aren't specifically mentioned in that document.

Though, sometimes it can be as simple as a computer restart, or fresh install of PT, that exhibits some improvements; nothing to do with the code at all.

Some days our studios feel like living, breathing (temperamental) things with minds of their own.

[Eric Lambert]

Originally Posted by johnsimmons

opening on 2022.4 32 buffer 8gb disk cache odd peak 90% but averaging between 55-80% but plays
todays 2022.5 32 buffer 8gb cache looks more like 45-60% on PT system usage.

And being that that's a mix session, you could get away with a much higher buffer and you'd see even lower percentages. 32 doesn't give it much breathing room.

[Actionmusic]

Originally Posted by Eric Lambert

John - I get the feeling that they're making little improvements all over the place, even if the "What's Changed" text doesn't indicate much. I'm seeing small improvements related to things that aren't specifically mentioned in that document.

Though, sometimes it can be as simple as a computer restart, or fresh install of PT, that exhibits some improvements; nothing to do with the code at all.

Some days our studios feel like living, breathing (temperamental) things with minds of their own.

I also get this feeling ! would be great if one of the Avid team could maybe say (non super tech-y) why the aux bus scenario happened now it's fixed and maybe that'd be positive news and welcomed - that's a speedy fix quickly addressed. I use routed folders so in essense (non tech knowledge) they were an AUX and folder setup so has that benefitted us? just good to know

and re: Marsdy also - Been on PT for 18 ish years, and a few things have changed with the buffers I know, but on macmini mojave 2021-2022 til now every session (mine are a big mix of audio and active VI's plus mix processing) was on no less than 512, mostly 1024 with fans blaring all day so the 32 buffer is my go to "no way this can handle this" stress test. . Yet to do a mix and production from scratch on this new Ultra so will see how my actual real world scenario pans out.

All feels like heading in the right direction though, currently I'm not missing any plugins of importance under rosetta and seems to be flying on reopened old sessions, with the proviso of keeping an eye open for the odd plug or setup (see Omnisphere above) that does weird things....

[Eric Lambert]

Originally Posted by johnsimmons

the odd plug or setup (see Omnisphere above) that does weird things....

That bit about Omni slipped pat me the first time around. I haven't used more than one instrument per instance of Omni in ages. It was common practice a while back, with many VIs (especially Kontakt), but these days it feels just as efficient to open a new instance of the VI for each new instrument. I haven't tested this in years, so I'm now curious to see if it would make much of a difference on my machine.