Jump to content

Jim Roseberry

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Posts posted by Jim Roseberry

  1. As has been mentioned, use Task Manager to have a look at the amount of RAM used by your largest projects.

    You need enough RAM to avoid hitting the VM Swapfile (in lieu of enough physical RAM)... as that'll kill performance.

    If your largest project uses 12GB RAM (and you've currently got 32GB)... bumping up to 64GB will have zero effect on performance.

    • Like 1

  2. I've had a MODX and current have a Montage (same basic hardware).

    Both work fine with Cakewalk by BandLab.


    The MODX USB connection can function as both an Audio Interface and MIDI I/O.

    Many folks just use the USB connection for MIDI I/O... and use a separate (dedicated) Audio Interface.


    On the MODX, go to Utilities>MIDI I/O, make sure MIDI In/Out is set to USB.


    Connect the MODX via USB and load the driver (download the latest version from Yamaha).

    Look in Device Manager (under Sound Video And Game Controllers)... and make sure the MODX is listed with no yellow exclamation points.

    If you don't see the MODX listed in Control Panel>Device Manager, there's something wrong with the USB connection.   If it's not listed, as far as the machine is concerned, it doesn't exist.

    If the MODX is listed in Device Manager, it's installed/working.

    In Cakewalk>Preferences>MIDI Devices, make sure the MODX is enabled as both MIDI input and output devices.


    Open a new project in Cakewalk.

    Add an Instrument Track

    On this Instrument Track, click on (enable) the Input Echo button.

    Set the Instrument Track's MIDI input to be MODX>MIDI Omni

    If you now play the MODX, you should see the Instrument Track's LED peak-meter showing activity (MIDI data is flowing to that track).

  3. 10 minutes ago, sadicus said:

    So the idea is that the Latency still exists but the reverb blends it together so it's not noticeable?
    Pre-Delay is something I just learned about and is so important for Recording Classical guitar, getting the transients.

    The OP's video shows how you can combine two sources of monitoring

    • Direct from the audio interface - dry signal (near zero latency)
    • Signal processed thru DAW (in this case with reverb set 100% wet)

    You need the DAW processed signal to be 100% wet (no dry signal).

    If the reverb contained any dry signal, it would cause comb-filtering (unwanted phasing/chorusing).

    • The signal direct from the audio interface is near zero latency.
    • The signal processed thru the DAW is subject to ~5ms round-trip latency.

    Had the Reverb contained any dry signal, it would be mixing dry vocal back in... but delayed by ~5ms.

    By keeping the Reverb signal 100% wet, only the reverb is subject to the ~5ms round-trip latency.

    • Dry vocal = near zero latency
    • Reverb = ~5ms latency

    In real physical spaces it often takes a few ms for the reverb (ambience) to reach your ears.

    Thus, that ~5ms latency (in this example) wouldn't sound unnatural. 

    • Like 2
    • Thanks 2

  4. The OP is combining hardware-based (dry signal) and software-based (100% wet signal) monitoring.


    To clarify, the 100% wet signal *is* subject to round-trip latency... but in the case of Reverb, you probably won't notice a few extra milliseconds of "pre delay".

    ie:  At 44.1k using a 64-sample ASIO buffer size, round-trip latency for many audio interfaces is ~5ms.

    The 100% wet Reverb signal is subject to that ~5ms latency... but (again) you most likely won't notice it... as it sounds like you dialed in an additional 5ms of "pre-delay".


    For those not familiar, Pre-Delay is a preset amount of time... before the reverb decay happens.

    Adding some pre-delay allows transients to come thru clean/clear... as they're not immediately masked by the reverb.

    • Like 3

  5. 1 hour ago, Cristian said:

    Also LOL the thought of even trying to compare the i9-10900 with these embedded CPUS 😂

    Yeah, just trying to make the point as to why I'm not super excited by Machine +.  😉

    It'll be enough to wet-the-appetite... but not capable of anything remotely close to a full-fledged DAW.


    Lest I sound anti-Machine, I do like Machine as a "finger-pad" controller.

    Best feeling pads of anything currently available...

  6. 34 minutes ago, Cristian said:

    I'm not really complaining. To be fair to NI, the price is competitive to MPC Live and MPC X.

    Machine + will be able to run decent (not amazing) Virtual-Instruments and EFX.

    MPC Live has (at least when I owned it) no ability to run Virtual-Instruments... and the onboard EFX/processing was basic.

    • Record/Playback 8 tracks of Audio
    • Trigger Samples

    IMO, Neither MPC Live nor Machine + have enough processing power to get excited about.

    MPC Live could be flaky.   Sometimes, it would power-up and there'd be no sound (have to reboot to regain playback).

    34 minutes ago, Cristian said:

    TBH my only question would be why NI went with the Z8350 and not the N4000 as a CPU, which is newer (2017 vs 2015) and better with similar costs.


    • Clock-speed = 1.1GHz
    • Max Turbo = 2.6GHz
    • 2 cores
    • 2 processing threads
    • Max RAM = 8GB


    • Clock-speed = 1.44GHz
    • Max Turbo = 1.92GHz
    • 4 cores
    • 4 processing threads
    • Max RAM = 2GB


    With such low clock-speed, neither CPU is well-suited for working with low-latency audio (small buffer sizes).

    At larger buffer sizes, the two additional cores on the Z8350 would allow greater loads.

    N4000 has slightly higher Turbo (Boost) frequency... but lower Base clock-speed.

    Tight enclosure means relatively small cooling; neither CPU will run Max Turbo for extended periods.


    As a point of reference, the new i9-10900k will run all 10 cores (20 processing threads) locked at 5.3GHz.


    When working at smallest ASIO buffer sizes, clock-speed is the single most important factor.

    ie:  Working at 96k using a 32-sample ASIO buffer size isn't something that lends itself to being heavily multi-threaded (spread across cores).

    In this scenario, the 32-sample buffer size means the CPU has 1/3 of a millisecond to process the next audio buffer and get it cued for playback.

    If anything interrupts this process, you'll experience a glitch.

    More cores is beneficial, but not at the expense of significant clock-speed.

    Performance increase from adding cores doesn't scale 1:1.  IOW, Doubling the number of cores doesn't double performance.

    Generally speaking, the more cores... the harder it is to achieve highest clock-speed (especially across all cores).

    In a perfect scenario, you want highest clock-speed... and most cores available.



    • Thanks 1

  7. 25 minutes ago, craigb said:

    Heh, yeah...  Over $9k for a Neal Schon model! 

    I'm not usually into signature instruments.  No way I'd spend $9k for a Les Paul.  Well... maybe a real '59 (worth well into 6 figures).  😂

    When I got that R9, it was on deep discount at GC.

    Had been sitting in the Platinum Room for a long while... and had a couple of tiny dings.

    Didn't pay anywhere near the current $6500 price.


    Had an Alex Lifeson LP for a good while.

    It was an exceptional guitar in most ways.

    One thing drove me crazy, it picked up router noise (poorly shielded).

    Best sounding Piezo of any instrument I've owned.

    My router is in the studio room... and it was nothing but that (rhythmic) "tick, tick, tick, tick...."

    • Like 1

  8. Haven't checked out the 2020 LP Standards.

    Had a 2014 R9 a while back.

    IMO, That R9 was the quintessential classic-rock guitar. 

    After owning/playing it, Standards (as gross as this sounds) felt/sounded "cheap" (by comparison).

    Sold the R9 as I prefer the ergonomics of PRS.


    The 2020 LP Standards look nice.

    I hope Gibson is going back to the fundamentals... and focusing on quality.


    When I was actively looking, Gibson Custom was just on a different level.

    Given the cost, I guess you could (should) expect that...

  9. I'm going to buck the trend.   😉

    Why reinvent the wheel?


    You've got your choice of many different 3rd-party "Samplers" (virtual instruments) that are FAR more advanced/evolved than a rev. 1 release.

    FWIW, I don't want to be tied to a proprietary sampler, with limited function, that only works with one host software.

    To me, that's taking a step two decades backward.


    Development hours are somewhat a "precious commodity".

    I'd rather the bakers focus on Cakewalk (DAW) which is their forte'.  

    Let other companies (who specialize in Vi's)... do what they do best.


    A cardiologist can treat you for the Flu.

    Is that really the best use of his/her time???    😁


    • Like 4

  10. 2 minutes ago, synkrotron said:

    I think that can be a little bit of a problem in that you will always be waiting for the next tech advancement.


    No matter when/what you buy, there's always something better/faster/etc... around the corner.


    I just got a 2020 Explorer.

    I'm sure the 2021 model will be (slightly) improved.  😄

    • Haha 1

  11. I said this the last go around with AMD... and it's certainly relevant for the upcoming Ryzen 4000 series.

    AMD needs to get their clock-speed significantly higher.


    AMD is killing it on multi-threaded performance... but the trade-off is (currently) poor ultra low latency performance.

    If I'm spending $1000-$2000 on a CPU (3990x is close to $4000), I don't want to choose between multi-threaded and single-core performance.

    I want the CPU to excel at both.


    Threadripper has TDP of 280w.

    That means aggressive cooling (noise)... and little (read none) over-clocking headroom.

    AMD will need to get TDP down... while getting clock-speed significantly up.

    It won't happen without significant architecture changes.

    • Like 1

  12. I would agree with most of what I've read above.


    The new Intel i9 10900k is a great DAW CPU

    • 10 Cores
    • 20 Processing Threads
    • 5.3GHz clock-speed
    • TDP = 125w (it'll run quiet with quality air-cooling)

    It's a great balance of multi-threaded performance, ultra low latency audio performance (super high clock-speed), cost, and quiet.

    • Thanks 1

  13. 14 hours ago, Grem said:

    @Jim Roseberry Have you run any tests on these yet? What is the biggest benefit for having this CPU? Just raw power? Or helps in a mix?  Or is it all about low latency?

    Hi Michael,


    It's a slight improvement vs. the prior generation socket-2066 i9 9980xe.

    Cost is about half that of the 9980xe.


    The 10980xe will be popular with folks who are more "hard-core" composers.

    With 18 cores, the 10980xe will be good for heavily multi-threaded scenarios (large scale projects).

    The advantage vs. Threadripper will be better performance at smallest ASIO buffer sizes (because higher clock-speed).

    Threadripper is amazing at heavily multi-threaded scenarios (video rendering)... but its Achilles-Heel is trying to work at extremely low latency.


    ie:  Say you have a Presonus Quantum... which lets you work at 96k using a 32-sample ASIO buffer size.

    That translates to 1ms (measured) total round-trip latency.

    Working at such low latency is not something that lends itself to being heavily multi-threaded (spread across multiple cores).

    This is where clock-speed is critical.

    The 10980xe is a more "balanced" choice than Threadripper.

    You've got good multi-threaded performance... AND... good ultra low latency performance.


    The new 10900k (socket-1200) is turning up the heat on all the above.

    • 10 cores
    • 20 processing threads
    • 5.3GHz clock-speed
    • Runs quiet with quality air-cooling
    • Like 2

  14. Are you looking for solid-body or hollow-body?


    If hollow-body:

    • Gibson ES-335 or ES-339 (smaller body) as mentioned by Tom @DeeringAmps
    • PRS Hollow-Body II

    If solid body:

    • PRS McCarty 594
    • Gibson Custom Les Paul R9
    • Suhr Modern Pro


    If this is a one-and-done type scenario, I'd go for a top-tier instrument.


    I'm a big PRS fan.  I love the attention to detail, the sound, and playability.

    The McCarty 594 has 58/15LT (low turn) pickups... and lots of nuance.

    You can get the McCarty 592 is single or dual cut.

    Pattern Vintage neck is similar (but not identical) to a R9 (has a slight V shape).

    Weight is typically 7.5-8 pounds.

    You can find the McCarty 594 with solid-body or hollow-body.


    If you're wanting a top-tier Les Paul, it doesn't get much better than a Gibson Custom R9.

    I had one not too long ago.  Weight was somewhere between 8.5 to 9 pounds.

    Neck is a little thicker than a 60s... but not baseball-bat.

    All the things people love about a Les Paul (fat neck pickup tone, classic "Rock" bridge humbucker tone).

    I sold my R9 only because I have several PRS guitars that can get very similar sounds with (to me) better ergonomics.

    That R9 was the best Les Paul I've owned.


    The Suhr Modern Pro is John Suhr's take on a "Super Strat".

    I like Suhr guitars for the same reason as PRS (attention to detail, consistency, sound, playability).

    The Modern Pro is often viewed as an "80s Rock" guitar (and it does that well), but it's capable of far more.

    The HSH pickup configuration can cover a lot of ground.


    If you're in a place where it's not a financial burden, Gibson Custom or PRS Private Stock are jaw-dropping instruments.

    You're getting the best... of the best.

    Some people will tell you there's no quality difference between a PRS USA "Core" model... and a "Private Stock".

    I've had the chance to compare many Core models side-by-side with numerous Private Stock.

    In almost every comparison, the Private Stock guitar just had a little something extra.

    Same with Gibson Custom...


    Set-neck guitars are going to have less "snap" on the attack (vs. bolt-on neck).

    Scale-length will also affect tone and playability.


    If you want to keep the cost down, check-out the new PRS SE Hollow-Body Piezo.

    These are new... and go for ~$1500.




    • Thanks 1

  15. Hi Adam,

    I've reloaded my main studio DAW... and don't currently have EuCon installed.

    I don't recall having either issue you mention above.

    I remember it was a bit tedious (at first) getting everything configured... as EuCon isn't directly supported.

    I had no issues setting up transport control, undo/redo, arming tracks for record, and other common things I'd want from a remote.


  16. Beware of Win10 Pro copies that are ridiculously cheap.

    The codes are often pirated.


    BTW, This can even happen with what looks like a fully legit copy.

    You can purchase a copy of Win10 off Amazon/etc... that comes in a fully "legit" package (MS disc/code/seal)... and find out the install key has been pirated.

    Even though the package is legit, it's useless.

    If you call MS, you'll be told it's not their problem... contact the seller.


    If it sounds too good to be true... it usually is


    • Like 3

  17. 11 hours ago, Adam Compeau said:

    Hey Jim...When you built my first music computer  back in the day,  I had Cakewalk for Midi and wonderful Samplitude for Audio.

    Samplitude eventually got midi going in a good direction, so I moved totally away from Cakewalk...

    Until this week.  The new Arranger tracks got my attention and now I made my first tune in Cakewalk with great results.

    A very enjoyable interface it is! Drag and Drop is a blessing!

    I hope you are doing well!

    Hi Adam,

    Where have all the years gone???   😉

    It's good to see long-time Cakewalk users using/enjoying CbB.

    Of recent, I've learned to be somewhat of a home-body.  Miss playing out... but (on the flip side) the break has been nice.

    Hope you and yours are safe/well!

    Hope the Bakers are all safe/well!

  • Create New...