Trancit@Zynewave wrote:
Hmm, this may be something that have gone bad in the latest 3.1.0 update, where I did some track-related fixes. I’ll investigate this.
Any news on this???
Trancit@michi_mak wrote:
supposed other hosts don’t suffer from freezing using the same midi file played through the same vsti with the same preset using the same optimized daw and the same buffer settings now what could i improve in my computer set up ???
As long as your system don´t have any problems with many backround tasks (Antivirus software …) or IRQ conflicts, there is really nothing you can really change…many tests have shown, that nearly all tweaking tips for windows systems are quite useless and don´t gain any additional performance
It is 99% how a host handles the different tasks…afaik it´s mostly a matter of how VST/i´s are hosted and how efficient the audio engine works especially on multicore systems…
This is where Reaper really excels it is completely unreached by any other host and this is as well where Podium seems to have some problems… sad but true
Of course there are many differences too, how good single plugins perform… the last days I did a little test of the performance of EQ´s
between Fabfilter Pro Q, Meldaproduction MEqualizer and DMG Audio Equick…
I played an audiofile and adjusted all the EQ´s to the same settings…
The host for the tests was MuTools Mulab, because it runs only on a single core and has a quite good average measurement included…
The result:
Audiofile only: 1% CPU
with EQuick: 1,8% CPU
MEqualizer: 1,3% and
Fabfilter Pro Q: 2,4% CPU…
It is all not much, but it sums up… how many EQ´s do you use normally in a project… for me, there are about 20 EQ´s with ease, which means for me, using Pro Q instead of MEqualizer ends up in a CPU load of 24% instead of 6% with the same settings… thats 4 times more only for the EQ´s…
TrancitJust did the same test on FL Studio because Reaper is playing in another league compared to all DAWs on the market…
FLS uses an average of 29% with some spikes of 32-33% and should be a little more a reference to Podium as it uses a later implemented Multicore support and is much much “older” than Reaper…
But on my machine it means, Podium uses about 50% more CPU than a comparable other host and this should be reason enough to investigate this further… It means as well, this CPU hunger isn´t caused by the UI…to me it seems more a problem of the VST implementation or audio engine of Podium, because the more VST are being used the higher is the difference in CPU useage…
Trancit@The Telenator wrote:
Sure would like to know the real facts/hard specs on what you guys are running, because as one said above, a few extra percentage points of CPU is more than welcomed to have such a well-conceived and inviting interface. After a few hours of staring at my former Cubase layout and its weird pastels, unnatural colorations, and uncustomizable screen, 8+ hours of looking at Podium is now a real blessing.
I’m routinely seeing only about 3-4% extra CPU for the UI on Podium, and I’m using a very average Core2Duo. If you are assessing usuage via the standard Task Manager, that will be vague and largely a waste of time. Get the Microsoft-endorsed FREE Process Explorer from SysInternals at technet.microsoft and it even offers the spiffy option of replacing your Task Manager if you wish. It can easily be configured to show all trees and handles in any live process. THEN you will know what’s really going on and what the real culpret is. I find that Podium uses slightly less resources than my last edition of Cubase, also, and just a tad more than REAPER, although it must be said that REAPER uses CPU resources quite differently (more upfront, less down the line usually).
Spikes can be caused by denormal issues with a few pesky VSTs. Do you have digitalfishphones’ normalizer.dll? That’s free, too, and will take care of that separate issue.
Podium runs like a charm in my case, but I point out that I set my Preferences and optimize my laptop very, very carefully to achieve great performance. Daws are not plug’n’play. It’s all in the sample rates, buffer settings and those little check boxes that often get ignored. I spent an entire two days right after the install getting things perfect. It was worth every second.
Finally, it’s easy to search this one out on the Net: Almost all of the DAWs out there these days have been tested and compared and rated for resource usuage — charts, graphs, comments, etc. There are a good dozen blogs/forums that discuss this stuff ad nauseum. There are several worse offenders than Podium, a few are far worse. This is all public info — no deep secret at all.
To make a blanket statement declaring Podium a “resource hog” without posting stats, specs, and maybe a screen shot or two is a real “stretch” to say the very least. My mileage, as I noted, is far different. I realize particular PCs have their own quirks and issues, but an internet search of this doesn’t support the claim either. Instead, several other big-name programs come up regularly. Good luck.
Sorry, but at least for me, it´s not true…
I am an optimize junkie and I think, I got really the best out of my system and have to admit, that Podium uses really a lot more CPU power compared to Reaper…
I did a little test project containing:
MDrummer for Drums with for tracks (Kick, OHH, CHH, Claps)
IL Sytrus and Nexus for Bass (one track each)
Sylenth1 for an arpeggio
Nexus for Pad 1
JPK6 for Pad 2
FX Fabfilter Pro Q (5 Instances)
FX Fabfilter Pro-C (2 Instances)
FX Fabfilter Timeless 2 (Send effect)
FX Valhalla Room (Send effect)
All playing together and measured with the normal Win7 Taskmanager (it may be, that this thing is not very accurate, but for comparing, should be suitable)
Podium uses average 46% (some spikes up to 51%) of my Intel Quad Core Q6600 @2,4GHz (all 4 Cores in use)
Reaper uses average 17% (some spikes up to 24%) with anticipative on and average 23% (some spikes up to 26%) with anticipative off…
Even with anticipative magic from Reapper turned off Podium uses here the double CPU as Reaper…that´s a real life situation and normal plugins used…no denormilization issues
If needed, I can make some more tests with other hosts…but Podiums performance is more than worse compared to others what I´ve seen so far
Trancit@Lion wrote:
Ah I see.
and yes, thats what I was talking about.I would actually still like to see an Android app if ever possible.
Are you really serious with that???
Since Fritz became a part time developer, the development of Podium decreases to (just a guess) 1/4 and you want him to waste more time for a toy???
I guess, the to-do list for Podium is as thick as the the telefon book of New York and I personally would love to see more features requests fulfilled, there are really important things to do.
I don´t know the sale numbers of companies brought out a phone app of their products, but I highly guess, that first your products have to become more popular, before a phone app can help by selling…
Companies like IK Multimedia, who reach with ease 5000 sales with a simple group buy, or Image Line, who have 10.000 or more dl of their product every single day could perhaps benefit from such an app, but will 10 sales of an phone app bring Fritz any further???
If you have a look on KVR, the mobile Apps section is such rarely used, that on one single page, you have posts from more than one week, for all companies, for all products they made…
I say again a big no go for a mobile app for many good reasons…
Fritz has to earn money and he will only do, if Podium become more popular…this will only happen, if it will become more competitive…
I personally love the workflow of Podium, but I won´t renew my license until I see a developement, which is important for my way of working…
I own 2.42 and since the 10th of april, there was nothing useable for me (I don´t use x64) and that´s status quo for me meanwhile since more than a half year.
I understand, that x64 was an important step for Podium, but now it´s time for many other very important workflow killer to be wiped out such as the lack of audio timestretch, which even Reason got now … 😈
Just my 2 cents
TrancitPlease implement everything… 8)
Trancit
TrancitNo, no, that would be fine…looking forward to that. 8)
Thx for listening.
Trancit
TrancitSuch an option would be great.
Would it be possible to include such an option in a rightclick context menu??
Rightclick a snapshot button to bring it up???
Trancit
TrancitDid I really wrote “envelopment” in the topic??? LOL 😆
@Fritz:
Good to see you back.
Once I am ready to resume work on Podium, I’ll post about the status. Hopefully the dust settles within a couple of weeks.
Wow, that´s quite some time again. I would like to know a little bit more, that I can judge, what this means to me and my work with Podium…
Trancit
Trancit@michi_mak wrote:
@Trancit wrote:
… but I knows him as a very honest and correct person…
Tranciti happily second that one!!!
Don´t quote my mistakes… 😀
TrancitNormally, Fritz (Zynewave) is very active and ambitious here on the forum…
In another thread he wrote:
Posted: Sun Feb 20, 2011 11:56 am
I’ve been busy with stuff not related to Podium the last few weeks, so the shop is still offline. I hope to have everything sorted soon. I’ll reply to this topic when the shop is open again.
If you want to be sure, just wait a little till he´s back, but I know him as a very honest and correct person.
Trancit
TrancitJust checked out with Toxic as well…whole combi: Sytrus, Drumaxx, Harmless, Direct Wave and Toxic…
No problems on exit…but working with single monitor here, so perhaps it´s the problem with Toxic on the second screen…
Trancit
TrancitI´ve just checked Drumaxx here and apart from the different midi standards, which are used, it works completely normal…just 2 octaves lower: Podium C1 is drumaxx C3, D1 is D3 and so on…
Trancit
Trancit@chase wrote:
Drumaxx’s C5 is Podiums C3
That´s the way how IL and some other handle Midi. There are different midi standards. The logical way is to have the middle C (note number 60) on C5. But the most known standard is with middle C as C3, which means having to handle with minus values for the 2 lowest octaves.
But I didn´t noticed other problems with midi keys, but will check again
The problem with other VST´s seem to be the quite unclear SDK…Developers can handle things in different ways, which sometimes break the rules of the normal VST standard and lead in many cases to incompatibilities, which the DAW developers have to solve by changing the way of handeling plugins…
I think, this is a never ending story and one the biggest pro reasons of closed systems like Propellerheads Reason/Record.
Trancit
TrancitOk, now, after you made me unsecure, I did the test 8) …
2 things are really for sure:
1. Dithering is for sure overrated till it comes to recordings in natural rooms (especially recordings with noticeable ambient reverb of the room) with very high dynamic …
2. dithering is really nothing else than adding a dither noise to the audio to mask quantization correlation. This correlation, which occurs by downconverting a high resolution signal into a lower, forces the waveforms more and more into a rectangle form. The dither noise smoothes the stairs, which appears by the converting process and let you recognize the downconverted waveforms better like there were sounding before…
About the third point, does the plugin change the bit depth by itself, I was not sure, so I did following test:
I played a softsynth (IL Sytrus) in Reaper and added a bit meter (Schwa Bitter). Bit meter showed me 32 bits were used.
Now I loaded a limiter with dithering option to the signal.
The limiter works internally with 64 bits, so the bit meter showed my 64 used bits after inserting the limiter.
I activated the dither option (to 16 bit) and yes, you are right: the bit output dropped down to exactly 16bit.
I am pretty sure, even if you convert the bit depth 10 or 20 times in a song, you won´t hear any difference in 99% of all music.
But if you want to keep the full signal flow for your personal feeling, you should avoid using such dithering plugins before the final master.
I´ve tried other plugins with dithering options and some doesn´t have even an option to turn it off, so the maximum bit output of those plugins (f*ck Waves, this shall be studi standard…) was only 24 bits…
Again, I don´t think, that anybody on this world could really hear this, but to be safe, one should not use plugs like these in the “normal” signal flow…
I wasn´t aware of this, so thx for forcing me to test 😀
Trancit