Jim Roseberry

11 hours ago, Patrick Derbidge said:

I can definitely believe that.  One of the main reasons I didn't consider AMD over Intel for many years was due to how hot they ran,. Having said that, wouldn't an Intel 9980xe be more of a comparison to the Thread ripper? I'm pretty sure a 9980xe would be a beast to try and cool as well.

• Threadripper - TDP = 280w
• i9-10980xe - TDP = 165w
• i9-9980xe - TDP = 165w

Socket 2066-i9 requires water-cooling, but because the TDP is significantly lower, it can run quieter.  Also, the chipset is passive-cooled (no fan).

2 hours ago, Patrick Derbidge said:

Personally, I think think this is an apples to oranges debate. I get it though. For years we are used to focusing on overclocking capabilities of Intel vs AMD and making those head to head comparisons but I just think that the AMD architecture is just so different now that you have to look at AMD and Intel from their individual stand points. AMD's Performance Boost (not be confused with PBO) works in such a unique way that it gives the user the best "overall" performance one can possible get out of the cpu, along with the ability to maximize memory performance through the infinity fabric. The point being that there is no reason to overclock a Ryzen chip, and if you do the performance gains are negligible considering the loss of warranty that comes with it. Intel's 9th and 10th gen is not wired this way and is more "traditional" one might say and the speed of memory has very little impact on performance (which can also be a good thing). I'm not saying that higher clock speeds don't help Ryzen, but rather that it is only one component of the Performance Boost system that they've come up with.

The problem with Threadripper is the TDP is too high.

An ultra quiet 3970x build simply can't be done.  I know for sure (I've done everything possible to make it work). 

Way too noisy for myself and clients!

This is why Threadripper has little to no OC potential (why the clock-speed can't be ramped up); heat quickly gets out of control.

 

I've mentioned this many times... but I'll repeat (yet again).

Not every process in a DAW can be heavily multi-threaded.

In those processes, 3.5GHz clock-speed is a significant performance hit.

Highest clock-speed and more cores is the key to dominant performance in all DAW scenarios.

This is why I rail on about clock-speed.

If you're talking ultra low latency audio settings, any type of performance throttling is not desirable.

 

 

4 hours ago, RSMcGuitar said:

Jim, since you seem to be the resident computer building expert, I was wondering if you have any advice on sound dampening a computer case?

Is this something people even do or is it more common to buy a case that is made for that already? I would be concerned that any dampening material might act as heat insulation and trap more heat in the case. Thanks!

Sound damping material in a case won't cause thermal issues.

Keep in mind that a "Silent" computer case isn't air-tight.

You've got intake and exhaust fans that keep air moving thru the case.

 

The sound-damping material in a case is really more for vibration and resonance type noise.

If you use noisy components in a "Silent" type case, it'll still be noisy.

A silent DAW is the sum of all components.  All components need to be quiet.

 

If you have proper intake/exhaust fans, acoustic damping material isn't a problem.

9 minutes ago, InstrEd said:

It is nice though that AMD does have some great chips out now and hopefully the next round of AMD CPU's will have some more head room in overclocking.  Us as consumers win.

Agreed.

I'm coming off sounding negative toward AMD.

I've used AMD in the past (many Athlon based machines)... and I'd do so again (if the circumstances were a good fit).

 

Things I'd like to see:

• Clock-speed equal or better than Intel
• TDP reduced to where noise is more manageable
• Motherboard issues ironed out

The highest end socket 2066 i9 (10980xe) is currently out of stock across the entire US.

That was some of the impetus to try and get a Threadripper build that would be rock-solid and quiet enough.

 

Noise: 

I'm used to a machine that's near dead-silent.  

Moving to a machine with high-RPM small fan (high pitched whine) is not appealing.

On the 3950x build, I used a 120mm quiet fan  focused on the chipset (to keep the small fan from coming on).

That took care of the noise issue with Ryzen-9.

I was disappointed that using a quality 360mm water-cooler resulted in no appreciable performance increase.

 

Upon using the 3950x in my main studio DAW:

Working at ultra low latency (performance wise) was a step backward from the (less expensive) 9900k.

With the 9900k, I could do things like play DI guitar thru Helix Native (software plugin version of Line-6 Helix) at 96k using a 32-sample ASIO buffer size.

That's playing in realtime thru Helix Native at ~2ms total round-trip latency (equal to Helix hardware).

With the 9900k, it was a heavy load... but audio is glitch-free.

With the 3950x, audio would occasionally glitch.

Granted, this isn't something that everyone would be doing, but (for me) was a significant step backward.

19 hours ago, Jeffrey O'Hara said:

It's a shame that reviewers don't test with pro audio and musicians in mind. 

Keep in mind that we (DAW users) are a minuscule group (number wise) compared to the general-purpose  and gaming computer users.

That's why the reviewers don't worry about audio testing...   

5 minutes ago, Starise said:

That high end thread ripper looks like something I could heat my house with

At 280w TDP, you could...   ?

On 4/22/2020 at 6:29 PM, Jeffrey O'Hara said:

Hi Jim,

I was wondering if during your testing, the 3960X faired better with overclocking. If not, would I be better off to see what the 4th Gen Threadripper would being when they come out this year in terms of performance? Zen 3 in general is rumored to have 10-15% increase in IPC and small speed bump. I already bought a Gigabyte Designare Trx40 so I'm pretty much committed to a Threadripper build. I would be upgrading from an i7-6800K and would continue to use an RME MADIFX PCI-E card. 

 

As someone who's built DAWs professionally for going on 30 years, here are my thoughts on AMD's latest offerings:

 

The 3970x (Threadripper) and 3950x (Ryzen 9) have very little OC headroom.

Little to none... (same with the 3960x)

If you get a Threadripper or Ryzen 9 with the idea of locking all cores at anywhere close to the maximum turbo frequency, you'll be disappointed.

 

sTRX4 motherboards have active-cooled chipsets.

You can get quiet 360mm water-cooler, quiet PS, quiet case, etc.

If you're used to something like a i9-9900k (which runs near dead-silent on quality air-cooling), the high RPM fan noise (whine) is particularly annoying.

• Threadripper has a TDP of 280w.  (large water-cooler absolutely necessary)
• Intel Socket-2066 i9 CPUs have a TDP of 165w (water-cooling necessary but will run relatively quiet - chipset not active cooled)
• The Ryzen 9 has a TDP of 105w (near dead-silent with large quality air-cooler)
• The i9-9900k has a TDP of 95w (near dead-silent with large quality air-cooler)

 

Threadripper and Ryzen 9 excel at heavily multi-threaded scenarios.

Video rendering is a perfect example.

For video rendering, Threadripper smokes Intel i9 CPUs.

Where Threadripper and Ryzen 9 are weak (compared to the i9 CPUs) is pushing heavy loads at super small ASIO buffer sizes (ultra low latency).

This is a scenario that doesn't lend itself to heavy multi-threading.

The higher clock-speed of Intel's i9 is a significant benefit in these types of situations.

 

Not every process in a DAW can be multi-threaded.

This is why clock-speed is still so important.

Another thing to note is that performance gain from adding cores doesn't scale 1:1.  

IOW, Doubling the number of cores doesn't double performance.

This is why you don't want to chose more cores at the expense of significant clock-speed.

Doing so will result in a performance "hit" (for all but heavily multi-threaded scenarios).

 

Why do I always mention the i9-9900k?

At $500, it offers a great balance of performance/cost/noise.

The 9900k can run all 8 cores locked at 5GHz.

You've got super high clock-speed... and 16 processing threads.

The 9900k will do so rock-solid... running near dead-silent.

 

Based on all the above, I was ultimately more intrigued by the 3950x.

I've tested it with both 360mm water-cooling... as well as large/quality air-cooling.

With its significantly lower TDP (105w vs 280w for Threadripper), it'll run as quiet as the 9900k.

Interestingly, when running 360mm water-cooling, there was no appreciable performance increase.

If you're talking "all core" clock-speed, the 3950x will top out ~4GHz (maybe 4.1GHz).

 

AMD is winning at IPC (instructions per clock).

However, Intel is winning at overall clock-speed.

Again, for all those scenarios that can't be heavily multi-threaded, the (relatively) inexpensive 9900k is going to best most CPUs.

 

One other thing to keep in mind... is that with AMD, you may see some flaky behavior.

Some of the motherboards don't allow you to disable things like onboard audio.

Not all software/plugins are optimized for AMD CPUs. 

To be fair, this really isn't the fault of Threadripper or Ryzen 9.

 

So what's my verdict on Threadripper and Ryzen 9?

If you're fairly tech-savvy and know what you're getting into... and especially if you're working with video rendering, you'll be fine with Threadripper/Ryzen 9.

I'd liken the scenario to old MG sports cars.  Can be a lot of fun... but may require "turning the wrench". 

ie: During several months of testing Threadripper and Ryzen 9 (including using the 3970x and 3950x in my main studio DAW), I had to reset BIOS numerous times (across multiple builds using multiple motherboards).  That's not a big deal for me personally, but for less-tech savvy... or those under pressure, it's not a welcome event.

As someone who builds machines for professional composers on demanding tight deadlines, there's absolutely no way I'd build a Threadripper or Ryzen based machine for the likes of Fred Coury, Timothy Wynn, Wayne Bacer, Evan Jolly, Noah Lifschey, etc.

 

If you're looking for a small tube-amp for the home studio, you might want to check out either the Revv D-20 or the Revv G20 (depending on the amount of gain you're looking for).

• Both are 20w tube amps (12ax7 preamp tubes, 6v6 power tubes)
• Embedded Two-Notes reactive-load (can be used without connecting a cab) and Torpedo Cab sim (can run two simultaneous Cab IRs)
• 9-lbs

$1200-$1300

 

I just got the G20... and it sounds/responds great.

I wasn't interested... until watching the video.  I thought it was just auto-generated bass parts.

 

The ability to drag drum/guitar parts into EZBass... is a whole different animal.

For complex "tutti" type parts, that could save a lot of time/effort!

Even if you prefer recording real electric bass, it would still be useful to (quickly) map out parts.

12 hours ago, Jay Soren said:

I just came across this thread from google. I am actually planning on building an i9-9900K workstation with a Gigabyte Z390 AORUS ULTRA motherboard and this scared me a little bit. I have an RME HDSPe AIO PCIe interface that I plan on using so disabling onboard audio would be ideal. Is the AORUS lineup bad and should I avoid it? As some background I produce a wide range of genres (everything from EDM to film scoring) and also do a lot of Photoshop work (UI design mostly). I'm also starting to question my CPU choice and wondering if AMD would be better suited for my needs.

Jim, you really sound like you know your sh*t, would you mind weighing in?

Thanks for any advice.

 

Was only an issue on the AMD motherboards.  

Does your machine have Thunderbolt-3?

How important is lowest possible round-trip latency?

Do you have dedicated mic preamps?

Impossible to make a good recommendation without more specific details.  ?

On 3/21/2020 at 11:13 AM, msmcleod said:

I bought one of these a long time ago... actually I traded in my YAS-32 sax for it (still regret that   ) - but it's great for both saving/restoring patches & also playing sequences.



It also worked great in the studio. I could sequence all my keys at home, "bounce" it to the data-disk then sync it up to the BRC in an ADAT system. Random access to anywhere in the song on the ADAT worked a treat. The only downside was manually entering tempo maps into the BRC.

For live, I'd store each song as a combination of sysex/patch changes so that my whole rig was set up exactly how I wanted in around 2-3 secs.

I owned one of those (years ago).

Used it a lot...

I've been programming a Montage for live use... and have really been enjoying the synth-engine.

Unlike past units, there's no separate "single-patch" and "multi-patch" paradigm.

All patches are "Performances".  Each performance can use up to 8 internal parts (individual sounds).

Each individual sound can be comprised of up to 8 "elements" (oscillators)... with some advanced triggering/switching options.

Not as flexible as Kontakt, but you can setup some advanced/detailed sounds.

If you're working with your own samples, John Melas' "Waveform Editor" is a tremendous help... as is Sample Robot.

 

I like having a balance of hardware and software synths.

Each have strengths/weaknesses.

 

 

I've been programming a Montage for live use... and have really been enjoying the synth-engine.

Unlike past units, there's no separate "single-patch" and "multi-patch" paradigm.

All patches are "Performances".  Each performance can use up to 8 internal parts (individual sounds).

Each individual sound can be comprised of up to 8 "elements" (oscillators)... with some advanced triggering/switching options.

Not as flexible as Kontakt, but you can setup some advanced/detailed sounds.

If you're working with your own samples, John Melas' "Waveform Editor" is a tremendous help... as is Sample Robot.

 

I like having a balance of hardware and software synths.

Each have strengths/weaknesses.

 

 

FWIW, I'd sit on the decision for a while... to make sure it's not "burn-out", "odd-times" we're currently living thru, etc.

 

Speaking for myself, I've loved music since my earliest memories.  I almost feel like it chose me (rather than me choosing to love music).

My grandfather was an opera-singer (died before I got to know him), so it may be genetic.

I can't imagine totally letting music go.

The technical side has kept me occupied to the point where I haven't much time/energy to write/record my own music.

The older I get, there's a growing sense of urgency to "find" more (some) time for writing/recording.

 

I've watched my step-father go thru retirement.  He's planned well and is fine financially, but he wakes up each day bored out of his mind.  He's bought new "toys" (takes a custom truck to shows), but it seems like a poor substitute for things he was passionate about.

 

If retirement means leaving behind things I've loved my entire life, I want no part of it.   

I want to be around music until the day I pass.

 

In any event, take the ramblings of a 53 year-old for what they're worth.   ?

That's absolutely crazy...

 

The whole idea is to discuss software/gear.

If you bring to light that someone can get a good deal on tools-of-the-trade, good on you and them.

KVR isn't what it once was...

We've been building custom audio/video machines for ~30 years.

If I can be of assistance, shoot me a PM.

File this in the memory bank:

Older HDMI cables won't work at 60Hz refresh-rates with 4k monitors.

Nvidia video cards aren't particularly problematic.

It's more of it either works... or doesn't type scenario.

Check cables first...

If that doesn't resolve the issue, I'd swap out the Nvidia card.

13 hours ago, Bapu said:

Yup, I own two each of those

Me too!  Also have a pair of their Pultec clones.

Hi Max,

I would do the clean install of Win10 on a separate physical drive.

Much easier to "clean-up" (once you've fully migrated)...

Behringer gets a lot of flack for their past business practices (much of which is deserved).

In the past decade, Behringer has absorbed some good companies, technology, and personnel (TC Electronic, Klark Teknic, Midas, etc).

These days, Behringer is releasing original designs like the X32 series, Wing, etc... that are feature-packed decent quality pieces of gear.

The Klark Teknic 1176 and LA-2A clones are both excellent (especially given the low cost). 

If you play live, the X32 series is used by many commercial sound companies.  Was at a venue this past Friday night... and the FOH console was an X32.

 

There's a trend recently to develop your own DAW application (UA, Behringer, Presonus, etc).

Unless you're 101% committed, it's re-inventing the wheel.  

It's like trying to compete with Kontakt.  

It can be done, but it's a herculean task. 

Even if successful, it'll take years to catch-up to the competition.

 

Behringer has the resources to develop a new DAW application, but is that the best use of their time/resources?

They're admitting up front, that it's going to take a long while (18-months) for initial release.

How long before it's able to compete head-to-head with the best DAW applications?

From watching other DAW applications over the past 30 years, you're talking 4-5 years of sustained/committed development.

 

Max, if the upgrade install of Win10 is a "mess", I'd start with a clean install of Win10.

Yes, it's a pain to go thru... but well worth it for a rock-solid foundation.

Max, I'm here if you need assistance.   ?

 

Nvidia video cards can work fine in a DAW.

They can also cause high DPC Latency.

ie:  When the RTX-2xxx series were first released, they were causing high DPC Latency.

 

BTW, This issue isn't limited to Nvidia.

The latest v1909 Win10 update (with updated drivers for UHD-630 graphics) is causing high DPC Latency.