Jump to content

Update: IKM - AmpliTube 5.5.6


Frank

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, Keni said:

Interesting. I hadn’t heard this. I’ll have to try it. I’ve stayed away from both 4&5 still preferring 3, but now I can’t get 3 running on new DAW (another authorization issue) so I’m on the fence using 4 or 5... Mostly 4 due to the resource hit of 5...

I sent a video to support , they confirmed it ... since v5 i tend to skip using it for that ... being on pair with neural dsp cpu hit , i use neural ... then.... i still prefer at 5 presets and flexibility specially for tones i love (blues , jazzy ect ) 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Zo said:

I sent a video to support , they confirmed it ... since v5 i tend to skip using it for that ... being on pair with neural dsp cpu hit , i use neural ... then.... i still prefer at 5 presets and flexibility specially for tones i love (blues , jazzy ect ) 

Yeah... I’ve never been happy with 4. Certainly not the CS version I must use. I used 5 yesterday with minimal annoyance of opening speed and such. Maybe if I could afford a more modern interface it may have faster driver speed and lowered latency? That would take the sting out of 5...

 

BTW I do like the results of my yesterday’s work...

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/13/2023 at 6:13 PM, abacab said:

That's some really annoying generic change log info. I really wish IKM would list the items that were fixed or improved!

I'm pretty sure it's most likely some different attempt at anti-piracy measures. I'm yet to see them doing fixes that really matter, like improving plugin performance so it loads faster, for example. Or fixing the blurry rendering of the 3D stuff.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Keni said:

Yeah... I’ve never been happy with 4. Certainly not the CS version I must use. I used 5 yesterday with minimal annoyance of opening speed and such. Maybe if I could afford a more modern interface it may have faster driver speed and lowered latency? That would take the sting out of 5...

 

BTW I do like the results of my yesterday’s work...

AT 5 is exellent , and it will be the last one i would ditch ...but ik reactivity is as efficient as a Biden answer lol 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Zo I had a chance to check and it is as I remembered.  There was progress made, AT5 is not as CPU hungry as it was when it was first launched and is actually pretty good for the quality of sound it produces. Good enough that always I use the latest version they put out now.

BUT, as I remembered also, there is still the bug with the routing going on. For those that don't know, if you click on dual routing an back on single routing, the CPU usage goes down. Unfortunatly, no one wants to do this on every track every time we load a project.

So to summarize: AT5's CPU usage is now pretty good, much better than when it launched, but could be truly awesome if they could fix this routing thing.

Edited by Jacques Boileau
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Jacques Boileau said:

So to summarize: AT5's CPU usage is now pretty good, much better than when it launched, but could be truly awesome if they could fix this routing thing.

Apart from the large IR files, most of IK's performace issues come from the 3D rendered interfaces. I'm missing some sort of mode where we can only tweak without being bothered by skeumorphism, especially in amps that have push pull knobs, like the Mesa Mark models. In some of those, you're sometimes not sure if the control is on or not.

Although, one of the good changes from 4 to 5 happenes with the Satriani amps. For some reason, some of them were extremely resource hungry in 4

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...