Bill Phillips

I'm mixing in Console View and dragged an Ozone 8 Imager VST3 from the FX rack of a track to the adjacent track and Imager followed by Cakewalk crashed. Both created crash notifications. I've attached screenshots of the notifications. Cakewalk created a recovery project file which I haven't tried because I had a recently saved copy to revert to. The crash is somewhat repeatable. I was able to repeat it once using the same steps as the first time. I've caused what appears to be the same crash randomly opening/closing and moving the plugin. I'm using version 2019.07 Build 65 (Early Access 2). I recently signed up for early access. No other problems with early access 1 or 2. Since this is my first crash report, I'm not sure how/where to post it. Let me know if I need to do anything else.

Thanks Steve. I reported it to iZotope as well and will add a report it on the early access thread.

I'm mixing in Console View and dragged an Ozone 8 Imager VST3 from the FX rack of a track to the adjacent track and Imager followed by Cakewalk crashed. Both created crash notifications. I've attached screenshots of the notifications. Cakewalk created a recovery project file which I haven't tried because I had a recently saved copy to revert to. The crash is somewhat repeatable. I was able to repeat it once using the same steps as the first time. I've caused what appears to be the same crash randomly opening/closing and moving the plugin. I'm using version 2019.07 Build 65 (Early Access 2). I recently signed up for early access. No other problems with early access 1 or 2. Since this is my first crash report, I'm not sure how/where to post it. Let me know if I need to do anything else.

Cakewalk is working fine for me. I've sporadically had problems, which I've fixed with lots of help from this and other forums; but none of my problems since CbB have been caused by CbB. I suspect that you'll be better off finding the problems and fixing them. Bill

Thank you for the tip. I didn't know about the image size restriction, but it makes sense. I will use links to images rather than attaching images. I usually use to OneDrive for image links. Is the only way to create an Aux Track routing an output or send to a "new aux track" which creates a patch point named "Aux n"?

The screenshot shows two Aux Tracks, both with Patch Point Inputs. I just created the second, Harp, Aux Track with Patch Point 4 as an input. I did this in a convoluted way. I first assigned one of the Harp track outputs to Patch Point 4 and the other to a new Aux Track. I then reassigned the Harp output assigned to the new Aux Track to Patch Point 4 and reassigned the Aux Track input to Patch Point 4. I don't think I used the same convoluted process for the first, Mix, Aux Track, but I can't think of another way to do it. Is there another way? The screenshot also shows Audio Tracks with Patch Point inputs. That's pretty straight forward because you can simply add an Audio Track, which you can't do with an Aux Track which, as far as I know, must be created by routing an output or send to a new Aux Track. Are there any advantages to using Aux Tracks in lieu of Audio Tracks? Are Audio Tracks more resource intensive or visa versa? It looks like the only difference is that an audio clip can be imported or dragged into an Audio Track. Are there any other differences?

Thanks, John. Yeah, why fix something that's not broken. How long had LatencyMon and Cakewalk been running at the same time when you read that latency? Were you mixing? Gigabyte GTX 750 Ti's are still available used at Newegg!

Jim Roseberry, thank you very much. You've answered all my questions and I really appreciate it.

MediaGary, thanks. I read that article too. By "hogging" the slot do you mean over using it's assigned PCIe lanes? If yes, I don't believe that's a problem for me. My graphics card is in a PCIe 2.0/3.0 x16 slot and I believe that it is the only user and does not need to share of those 16 lanes. My PC has 40 lanes. Most of the others are shared, but not those. There's a newer model RX590 that has a 256-bit memory interface. I wonder how it would compare (DPC latency wise) with the GTX-1660?

Thanks, Jim. All true. My video card is causing DPC Latency of 500+us and I do need for the video card to "get-out-of-the-way." And I understand that the video card can not allow me to run more audio processing and that my video performance is fine. The problem is DPC Latency with my ASIO buffer size set to the highest (1024 samples) value. My ASUS X99-DELUXE II does not have onboard graphics. It supports up to 3 video cards. I didn't want or plan to use multiple video cards but liked its other features such as USB 3.2 and Thunderbolt 3 support. I wonder if the fact that it can support 3 video cards increases DPC latency? Also, I don't do anything with video right now. All I do is record and mix audio. So, based on what I'm learning from you, I want a video card with modest graphics processing capability and the lowest DPC latency possible. And if possible, one that occupies a single slot. Is that out of the question given my desire for low DPC latency? I've also read that AMD video cards have lower DPC latency times than nVidia cards. Is that "old " or "fake" news?

Thanks Jim. That's a lot of useful information. I've been focusing on DirectX driver latency, which for my R7 250 is >0.5 ms because Focusrite tech support thought it was suspiciously high. However, I'm a little confused. At the top of your post you mention that high end video cards won't improve DAW performance; but the AMD cards (Vega-64 & Radeon VII) with the lowest latency are both high performance gaming cards and they cost considerable more than my audio interface. Do you think using one of these would help me? On first look the Radeon VII looks to be the top performer of the two. Also, as you point out they may be pretty noisy. I use the Izotope music production suite which includes three metering plugins that I like. When they're not bypassed, crackling is a lot worse. So at least some of my crackling problems seem to be associated with video processing. Thanks again.

Thanks Chuck E Baby. I upgraded to 2nd gen drivers which made significant improvement. So I think the drivers are as good as they get and LatencyMon shows them down the latency list a way, well below the DirectX video drivers which are at the top at >0.5ms.

I need to replace my existing graphics card and would like to install one with the lowest driver latency possible. According to LatencyMon my existing R7 250 graphics card driver is my highest latency driver at >0.5 ms. I have two displays, one each HDMI and VGA. The VGA monitor is flickering so I'm going to replace it with a second HDMI monitor which requires a graphics card with two HDMI interfaces. I'd like to get a graphics card with the lowest driver latency possible. Currently audio playback during mixing crackles at the highest sample buffer size available for my Focusrite Scarlett 18i8 mainly because of the plugins I use. The CPUs 12 threads hardly ever exceed 10% but the graphics card latency is >0.5 ms. My video card is in the PCIe 2.0/3.0 x16 slot closest to my i7-6850K CPU which has 40 PCIe lanes. My existing graphics card is only x8 but the the slot it's in has 16 dedicated PCIe lanes. I understand that video performance is not important to Cakewalk's performance but driver latency is. So, I'm wondering if using a graphics card that can use all 16 lanes and operate at lower latency would reduce audio crackling during mixing. Any suggestions appreciated.

The USB Device Tree Viewer seems to show a lot more detail.

Bob, thanks. My ASUS X99 Deluxe II motherboard has WiFi capability but I didn't install the software or the antenna and don't see WiFi interface in Device Manager. I did install the Thunderbolt 3 card but have never used it. I want to improve my recording and mixing capabilities before I spend any more on stuff.

Thanks Craig. I was only using the Izotope Production Suite and they're all up to date.

I couldn't agree more. I believe that scook responded to a Cakewalk forum thread on meter options with a proposal similar to yours in final days before Gibson shutdown Cakewalk in November 2017.

BRainbow, Sidney Earl Goodroe, Starship Krupa, thanks for the explanations and suggestions. Though I haven't had a chance to try them yet, I'm sure they will all help. I to use Windows Defender and disable the Network Connection before turning Windows Defender off. I have Windows 10 Pro so have access to policies. Does anyone know if a DirectX execution time of over 0.5 ms is ok? Focusrite tech support thought that might be a problem.

Thanks folks. Looks like we have consensus. I do that too to reduce the popping and crackling; but I don't get dropouts even at 64 samples. Unfortunately the largest ASIO buffer size offered by Focusrite Scarlett 18i8 with it's new driver is 1024 and I still hear pops and clicks at 1024. However, I'm still confused. Aren't the ASIO buffers used to account for I/O processing only not internal processing with the ASIO input buffer provide time for an analog input to be converted to digital, processed by the audio interface and placed into the Cakewalk input buffer, and the ASIO output buffer provide time for a Cakewalk output to be processed by the audio interface and converted to an analog signal? The attached Cakewalk Driver Settings screenshots. ASIO's latency calculations are based only on I/O processing latency and not on Cakewalk project processing including plugin latency. These numbers do not change based on project complexity or plugin selections. So I don't understand why ASIO buffer size increases are required to accommodate plugin processing delay? Don't the Record and Playback Buffers handle Cakewalk processing delays? Mine are set to 512 kB, I think by default. I don't remember changing them. However, after reading the paragraph pasted below from the new PDF documentation. I progressively reduced record and playback buffer sizes to 1 kB. Magically CPU utilization increased a little and the popping and cracking reduced. On initial testing I didn't hear any pops or crackles at an ASIO buffer size or 128 samples. Note to self: I haven't tested the Record I/O buffer size while recording yet. Copied from top of page 1481 in the new PDF documentation (couldn't find in the online help documentation) The “I/O Buffer Size” may not be well matched to your hard disk Cakewalk may be reading and writing audio data to/from your hard disk in chunks that are either too large or too small for your particular hard disk's characteristics. Go to Edit > Preferences > Audio - Sync and Caching and try different values for Playback I/O Buffer Size and Record I/O Buffer Size until you find values that works well for your particular hard disk: The default value is 64. Try reducing this value, to 32, then 16. After each change, close the dialog box (click OK) and re-test your project's recording/playback behavior. If problem(s) persist, try increasing this value, to 128, then 256, then 512. Again, close the dialog box and re-try your project after each change. If you have an older, slower computer or an older, slower hard disk, you should try increasing the buffer size; decreasing is not advised on slower hardware. However, increasing this setting uses more of your computer's RAM. If you have a smaller amount of RAM in your computer, increasing the buffer size may not help. If problem(s) persist, restore this value to its default and continue with the next step.

TVR Productions, I don't have a clue what causes that. I haven't experienced that problem. Sorry.

Thanks razor7music. That's existing post is pretty old, but a lot of the discussion seems relevant. My Record and Playback I/O buffer size is 512 kB by default. I don't recall ever adjusting them. The 64-bit Double Precision Engine on but I don't believe that's a problem. My CPU is idling along at under 10% of capacity.

Thanks CJ. I use the Izotope Production Suite which includes Ozone 8 Advanced, Neutron 2 Advanced, Nectar 3, Insite 2, Trash 2, VocalSynth 2 and RX 7 Standard. I have all but RX 7 in the mix with multiple instances of Neutron 2. I use RX 7 offline only. I know that these plugins use a lot computer power; but as I stated, I have plenty of CPU power and RAM left. I am able to mix with a 64 sample buffer except that the pops and clicks make listening very difficult. What I'm looking for and haven't found is where's the bottle neck causing the pops and clicks? LatencyMon gives it a thumbs up.

What can I do to stop the popping and clicking during playback? I'm using the Izotope Production Suite for mixing and I understand that this suite is CPU intensive but my CPU never breaks a sweat. I'm hearing consistent popping and crackling (sounds like bacon frying in another room) while mixing with sample buffer settings of 64 to 1024 samples on my Focusrite Scarlett 18i8. I updated to the latest 1.10b3 version of the driver which drastically improved performance but not enough to eliminate the popping and clicking. With a sample buffer size of 64 samples, round trip latency is 9.3 ms (412 samples). With a sample buffer size of 1024 samples, round trip latency is 97 ms (4274 samples). The only difference I notice is that there's significantly more popping and clicking at 64 samples than at 1024 samples. At 64 samples, playback sometimes won't start after a mixing change, but pressing play again gets it going. Focusrite tech support, which has been very supportive, have suggested that the problem could be my DirectX Driver which LatencyMon shows to have a highest execution time of 0.52 ms. Other execution times >0.04 ms are Kernal Mode Driver Framework at 0.497 ms, High Definition Audio Bus Driver at 0.32 ms and TCP/IP Driver at 0.24 ms. I used dxdiag to verify that I have the latest DirectX 12 driver. I also have the Intel Driver and Support Assistant which keeps all Intel related drivers up to date. A screenshot of my PC System Info is attached. I have set Page File Size to 0. My reasoning is that I have 32 GB of memory and Cakewalk doesn't us more that 12 GB. I'd set the Page File to 800 MB as recommended by the Page File setting dialog to have enough room for a dump file, but decided to go to 0 MB because LatencyMon was showing Hard Pagefaults and I thought that Windows 10 might be moving memory pages to memory even when there's lots of available memory. Pagefaults did drastically reduce but not to 0. With the Page File set to 0 MB LatencyMon shows 6 Hard Pagefaults. How can that be? I've attached a Memory Resource Monitor screenshot showing memory use during Cakewalk playback. The CPU Resource Monitor and the Cakewalk Performance Monitor that none of my CPU's 12 threads are more that 10% utilized. Basically it looks like my computer is idling along not breaking a sweat while I'm hearing all this popping and clicking. Is there some way to get my computer to take more interest in eliminating popping and clicking? My ASUS X99-Deluxe II Motherboard has 40 PCIe lanes a number of BIOS setting options to to best use those. I've settled on settings that seemed best for me but I'm not sure. My main two drives are M.2 and the third is a SSD. My video card is an AMD R7 250 series. It has an AMD Settings app that is frequently requesting that I update the Radeon driver that I'm not even sure I need because I don't do video games, 3D graphics, or use the HDMI audio output. I also have an Intel Thunderbolt 3 card which I still can't afford a audio interface to use. Any suggestions appreciated.

So, happy to see it. I moved it to OneDrive so I can access from anywhere. The online documentation is very hard to read on my phone which I routinely use for technical reading when I have downtime (doctor's office, waiting for planes, etc.) Hope it can be kept reasonably current.

Sound on Sound Magazine has frequent Cakewalk by Bandlab technique articles by Craig Anderton. You need a subscription. The digital subscriptions are $40-$50/yr I think. The magazine always has a lot of well written product reviews written by experienced contributors along with tutorials, mix reviews, and lots of other recording, mixing and mastering topics.