Jump to content

Jim Roseberry

Members
  • Content Count

    697
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    8

Everything posted by Jim Roseberry

  1. You can adjust the ASIO buffer size... but opening the ASIO Panel or the audio interface's control panel applet.
  2. It's the clock and fidelity. Keep in mind that some of these composers also track instruments (including large drum-kits). Another thing to keep in mind is that professional composers don't necessarily deliver a final stereo "bounced down" mix. Depending on the project, they may provide stems or multi-track audio... to be mixed on a large-format console with the rest of the film/dialog/EFX/etc. Yet another scenario to consider is that these composers sometimes make use of high-end outboard processing (channel-strips, reverb, dynamics, Axe-FX, Kemper, re-amping, etc). Those extra inputs/outputs allow far more flexibility in these scenarios. Just talked to one client yesterday who absolutely loves the sound. This guy is a rock-star... who now composes for TV/Film. He's got both commercial and home studios. His commercial facility is full of amazing gear and set-up to track high profile players/singers.
  3. The old Cakewalk forums had a dedicated "Hardware" forum. It would be nice if that were implemented here. 😉
  4. If used solely to monitor virtual-instruments, the noise-floor of the audio interface will certainly have a much less profound impact. Ironically, the most popular audio interface with our professional composer clients, the Antelope Orion (due to its high fidelity and excellent clock). Almost all of our professional composer clients (TV/Film/Games) are using the Orion. Specs here: https://en.antelopeaudio.com/products/orion-32-gen-3/
  5. Noise-floor on a dedicated audio interface with external A/D D/A can be very significantly lower than onboard audio. ie: Realtek isn't going to get anywhere close to average noise-floor of -118dB. You may not notice a 12dB difference on a single track... but multiply that across 24 tracks of audio... and it's an appreciable difference. Like pulling a veil of noise off the project... Even dedicated audio interfaces that have A/D D/A inside the PC rarely achieve noise-floor better than ~104dB (usually closer to -100dB).
  6. One other thing: Is the MIDI controller connected to a USB-3 port? If so, some older Audio and MIDI interfaces have issues with USB-3 controllers (especially 3rd-party USB-3 controllers - meaning non-Intel).
  7. I'd test with a different DAW application... to see if the MIDI performance data (from said controller) is being recorded. If so, the issue is down to CbB/Sonar. If you don't have another DAW application, Reaper would be perfect for test purposes. It's a small download... and can be uninstalled without leaving lots of remnants.
  8. Axe I/O was built for this purpose. I'm sure it'll work well.
  9. How many channels (and what type) of I/O do you need? Do you need mic preamp/s? What is "reasonably priced"? Meaning, what's your budget? Frankly, any dedicated audio interface with a proper ASIO driver is going to be an improvement. There's a lot of variation on cost, quality, and round-trip latency.
  10. Helix Native is IMO the best software based amp-sim plugin currently available. A workaround for not having a standalone version: Save an otherwise empty project with Helix Native setup and ready to play. You've got User presets in Helix Native... so you can swap sounds quickly. The UI is pretty easy to get around (especially if you're familiar with the hardware Helix). You can load your favorite IRs (for both Cab and acoustic-body-resonance). Another thing to keep in mind: The better your front end DI, the better results you're going to get with Helix Native. If you've seen posts saying Helix Native doesn't sound as good as the hardware, it's often because the user is comparing the hardware Helix (120dB dynamic range on the input) to a $100 audio interface (crap DI) as the front end for Helix Native.
  11. I'd like to try it out. Thus far, I haven't seen a link to download a trial version. It's similar to the Adobe Creative Cloud (Premier Pro, After Effects, and Photoshop). I'm productive with Adobe... but After Effects can get sluggish (especially with larger projects).
  12. We have clients who are professional composers who run about a dozen internal drives. Those doing huge orchestral mock-ups (common for scoring larger video games) are often using numerous SATA and M.2 Ultra SSDs.
  13. Third party plugins allow you to "cherry pick" from a plethora of options/features. If you can catch the Sheps Omni Channel on sale, it's an amazing/flexible tool.
  14. For those who don't know... Don't assume USB-C means Thunderbolt-3. USB-C ports can carry Thunderbolt-3 or USB-3.1 Many motherboards have USB-3.1 (via USB-C)... but don't have Thunderbolt-3. If the logo doesn't show a "Bolt of lightning", it's not carrying Thunderbolt-3. To have Thunderbolt-3, the motherboard has to specifically have the controller onboard... or via AIC (add-in-card).
  15. If you use the right fan/s, you have to pull the side panels off the case... and put your ear right next to it to hear it. There's no way you're going to hear said fan with the side-panels on a "quiet designed" case. 😉
  16. Preferences>MIDI>Playback and Recording>Playback>Prepare Using 250ms Buffer Try tripling this value. This seems to have solved a similar (but not identical) issue for another client (who's using MOTU MIDI interfaces).
  17. Pay close attention at 14:47 Instruction Per Clock is faster on the 3900x But... (the devil is in the details) The highest Turbo speed is 4.6GHz/4.5GHz... and note that it can't be run across all cores. @14:22 "Okay, but JF, IPS is better on the 3900x... why is the 3700x (same core count and thread count as the 9900k) losing in many of the tests?" @14:33 You'll hear the exact thing I've said above. "Clock-Speed" @14:46 "Intel is still superior in the All Core Clock-Speed. To actually best Intel, AMD has to get clock-speed higher. The fact that 3900x/3700x can't run all cores at full Turbo Speed is both disappointing/telling. That means there's little to no over-clocking headroom (no means of closing the clock-speed gap). The 9900k can easily run all 8 cores at 5GHz. Idle temps in the 30's with quality air cooling. If I'm building a new DAW, why would I choose a 3700x over the 9900k? It's $50 less for a slower CPU (especially scenarios that aren't heavily multi-threaded) No Thunderbolt-3 (unless you pay ~$1000 for the motherboard) Apps not fully optimized for AMD CPUs Had the clock-speed been 5GHz across all cores, it would be a whole lot more exciting (especially with the 3900x).
  18. The 9900k doesn't run particularly hot. (Not like socket 2066 where you're forced to use a large water-cooler). You need robust air-cooling. Nothing at all to worry about... Near dead-silent Multi-threading is made use of in DAWs... but not all processes can be multi-threaded (as I mentioned above). In a perfect world, you want highest available clock-speed... and the highest number of cores you can get. Right now, the 9900k (IMO) is the sweetest spot price/performance wise. Precisely because you can have 8-cores (16 processing threads) all locked at super high clock-speed. At the risk of repeating, to best it... you're talking high-end (not bottom end) socket 2066 i9 (significantly more expensive). When it comes to heavily multi-threaded scenarios, you've got twice the number of processing threads (vs the 9700k).
  19. If you're going to go for the i9-9900, you should just go ahead and get the i9-9900k version. With proper configuration, all 8 cores (16 processing threads) can be locked at 5GHz. With a quality air-cooler, it will do the above while running near dead-silent. When choosing a CPU for DAW purposes, clock-speed is the single most important factor. Having more cores is beneficial... but not at the expense of significant clock-speed. Not all processes in a DAW can be heavily multi-threaded. Playing thru an AmpSim plugin at 96k using a 32-sample ASIO buffer size doesn't lend itself to being heavily multi-threaded. Some plugins like UVI's Falcon will only use a single core. Also note that core performance doesn't scale 1:1. IOW, Doubling the number of cores doesn't double performance. What you absolutely don't want to do is choose a CPU that has more cores... but significantly slower clock-speed. This is why Xeon CPUs are often a bad choice for a DAW. They have more cores... but (typically) significantly slower clock-speed. This results in a significant performance hit (compared to standard CPUs). Right now, for the reasons mentioned above, the i9-9900k is an excellent choice for most DAW users. You've got super high clock-speed (5GHz across all cores)... and 16 virtual cores (processing threads). To best the 9900k, you have to go high-end socket-2066 i9 (considerably more expensive). Ryzen is good for heavily multi-threaded applications (video rendering in particular). Where Ryzen falls short is with processes that can't be heavily multi-threaded. If you want/need Thunderbolt-3, Ryzen isn't practical. It's available on ultra high-end motherboards (~$1000 for the motherboard).
  20. To use the Eucon "ProTools Control" app on an iPad, the DAW itself need not be connected via WiFi. The DAW itself can be connected via hardwire (Ethernet). There's no performance hit (or worry about higher DPC Latency). The iPad (tablet) is the only device connected via WiFi. I've already tested this configuration. It works fine with Sonar/CbB... as well as all other Eucon enabled DAW applications (obviously including ProTools). Other than the time to actually configure all the options, it's pretty easy to set-up.
  21. There's a Eucon control surface plugin for CbB. Many folks don't know this, but you can actually use the (free) ProTools Control applet to control any (Eucon capable) DAW application. It will require some custom mapping/preparation... but it works great. I've thought about doing an instructional video on this topic.
  22. What's happening is that you're monitoring via hardware AND software... simultaneously. The software based monitoring is subject to latency (thus the slap-back). The hardware based monitoring is near zero latency. Combine the two (and depending on the amount of latency)... and you'll hear anything from flanging (combfiltering) all the way to slap-back sounding delay. This can happen with ANY audio interface and DAW software (not exclusive to your situation, audio interface, or version of Cakewalk/Sonar). You need to choose a single method of monitoring (either hardware or software - just not both simultaneously). If you monitor via the audio interface's onboard hardware, don't enable the Input Echo option in CbB/Sonar. If you monitor via software, make sure to mute/disable the audio interface's onboard monitoring (done via its control-panel app).
  23. Have you tried disabling the "Fast Bounce" option? Some plugins can't cope with it being enabled.
×
×
  • Create New...