Motorola DSP563xx Emulator (BETA) (Access Virus, Nord Lead, Waldorf MW...)
-
Optical Fingerprint Optical Fingerprint https://www.kvraudio.com/forum/memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=269565
- KVRist
- 52 posts since 28 Nov, 2011 from Sweden / Greece
Hello there! My favorite presets keep disappearing. I add a new category, I drag presets into them, and everything is fine. Whenever I reload the plugin, they just aren't there. Is it a known issue? (OsTirus)
- KVRAF
- 10696 posts since 20 Nov, 2003 from Lost and Spaced
I don't think you can drag them in there. Right click and it should give you a choice to Add Folder or Add a single preset.
-
gentleclockdivider gentleclockdivider https://www.kvraudio.com/forum/memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=203660
- KVRAF
- 6173 posts since 22 Mar, 2009 from gent
I’m glad they have finally done all the iterations of the virus , which means they can now focus on the good synths
Microwave xt incoming !
Microwave xt incoming !
Eyeball exchanging
Soul calibrating ..frequencies
Soul calibrating ..frequencies
-
- KVRist
- 215 posts since 5 Jul, 2019
This is surprising to me. With a M1 Max CPU and Ableton, opening Osirus with latency on 1 I get CPU overruns of 200%+ without even playing a note. (RME UCX II, 48k @ 64 samples). I've got to crank it up to 8 to be playable (5-10% CPU), which generates a reported latency of just under 20ms so I stopped using Osirus.
Just reinstalled Logic Pro X since I haven't been using it... works perfect on the 1 setting, CPU is negligible. Blast you Ableton...
- KVRian
- 1151 posts since 21 Jul, 2012
Yeah.. Ableton can be a real pig in that department. The plugin runs perfectly and is perfectly playable on the "1" setting. I don't see any real advantages in running it on "0" setting if all that does is increase CPU load.
- KVRAF
- 1707 posts since 1 Mar, 2010 from Paris
AFAIK, setting to "0" doesn't increase the CPU load, it simply reports it correctly to the DAW. By setting to "1", it seems the plugin displaces the computing outside the DAW, if that makes sense, to avoid potential problems on older CPUs. But the general load remains the same. Please let me know if I'm wrong.
Free banks for soft synths | ghostwave.fr | soundcloud.com/ghostwaveaudio
- KVRian
- 1151 posts since 21 Jul, 2012
Yes, all that is fine in theory. But in practical application all that users will notice is:Ghostwave wrote: ↑Mon Apr 29, 2024 8:06 am AFAIK, setting to "0" doesn't increase the CPU load, it simply reports it correctly to the DAW. By setting to "1", it seems the plugin displaces the computing outside the DAW, if that makes sense, to avoid potential problems on older CPUs. But the general load remains the same. Please let me know if I'm wrong.
Setting 0 = I'm getting buffer overloads in my DAW and the plugin is barely usable
Setting 1 = Haleluya, I can play an run the plugin in my DAW without any problems whatsoever and can run multiple instances even.
-
AdvancedFollower AdvancedFollower https://www.kvraudio.com/forum/memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=418780
- KVRian
- 1242 posts since 8 May, 2018 from Sweden
I'm running an older Ryzen 3800X and haven't had any issues.
I think the TI Snow firmware is enough most of the time. You usually don't really need 16-part multitimbrality in a VST since you can just add more instances if you need them. This will also cause the DAW to distribute the load across your CPU cores more evenly than trying to do it all inside one instance of the VST. The Snow provides enough polyphony most of the time unless you're trying to do something silly like 8 voice unison with Complex oscillators.
I think the TI Snow firmware is enough most of the time. You usually don't really need 16-part multitimbrality in a VST since you can just add more instances if you need them. This will also cause the DAW to distribute the load across your CPU cores more evenly than trying to do it all inside one instance of the VST. The Snow provides enough polyphony most of the time unless you're trying to do something silly like 8 voice unison with Complex oscillators.
-
- KVRAF
- 35569 posts since 11 Apr, 2010 from Germany
It does. The lower the set buffer size, the more CPU will be utilized.
I don't know what technical background it has that a setting of 0 is also the only setting which will report the real CPU usage to the DAW, but, I'm sure I wouldn't understand it either, if they explained it.
- KVRAF
- 2521 posts since 6 Jul, 2013
As I understand it, with a default 1 buffer, much of the DSP work is happening independently of how the DAW reports CPU usage (which is usually calculated by how quickly the current audio buffer is processed, I believe).chk071 wrote: ↑Mon Apr 29, 2024 9:44 am It does. The lower the set buffer size, the more CPU will be utilized.
I don't know what technical background it has that a setting of 0 is also the only setting which will report the real CPU usage to the DAW, but, I'm sure I wouldn't understand it either, if they explained it.
At 0, everything is done in the audio loop, so it takes longer to process for the DAW which consequently reports a higher, more accurate load to the DAW.
In both cases, the actual work the CPU does to calculate the synth is basically the same*, it's just that in the first case, the DAW can't report on what it doesn't know is happening.
* Though there may be performance optimisations going on, resulting in some efficiency gains.
-
- KVRAF
- 35569 posts since 11 Apr, 2010 from Germany
Alright.
As far as I understood it (the devs explained it some times on Discord), the set buffer size does affect CPU utilization though. The question is how much, but, they definitely said that it does.
Many ways to save CPU though: Set higher buffer size in the plugin, set the ROM to Snow, reduce the DSP rate etc.
As far as I understood it (the devs explained it some times on Discord), the set buffer size does affect CPU utilization though. The question is how much, but, they definitely said that it does.
Many ways to save CPU though: Set higher buffer size in the plugin, set the ROM to Snow, reduce the DSP rate etc.
- KVRAF
- 10696 posts since 20 Nov, 2003 from Lost and Spaced
Do you have the latest version. The update cut my single use CPU from 30% to @ 10%.
-
- KVRAF
- 1531 posts since 20 Feb, 2003
The TC Electronic Powercore (Motorola DSP card) also has 4 buffer multiplier settings. So it’s interesting they actually went a similar route. Which sort of makes sense when you remember these are really “less plugin” and more “virtual DSP card inside of a plugin.”
In theory raising the buffer makes it easier for the CPU to process within the extra time window. In practice, provided you can run (without crackles etc) in a 1X buffer, it seems to have less impact than might be expected. Maybe extra buffers make more sense at 96kHz? I didn’t test. Otherwise the Virus A Rom, or Snow in the TI’s case, would be the more impactful change for systems which struggle.
The “No Buffer” setting is something the Powercore can’t do - It’s always between a 1x and 4x buffer. It’d be interesting to hear why adding additional buffers means it only reports the base plugin usage to the host, and not the usage for the actual 56k conversion - though it still shows in your systems CPU monitor.
Either way, expect to be able to run significantly less instances if you use a zero setting, and have increasingly noticeable latency above a 1x setting. (Try to play a rapid repeating note, at the highest settings, and you should notice you have a harder time doing it because of the latency.. )
In theory raising the buffer makes it easier for the CPU to process within the extra time window. In practice, provided you can run (without crackles etc) in a 1X buffer, it seems to have less impact than might be expected. Maybe extra buffers make more sense at 96kHz? I didn’t test. Otherwise the Virus A Rom, or Snow in the TI’s case, would be the more impactful change for systems which struggle.
The “No Buffer” setting is something the Powercore can’t do - It’s always between a 1x and 4x buffer. It’d be interesting to hear why adding additional buffers means it only reports the base plugin usage to the host, and not the usage for the actual 56k conversion - though it still shows in your systems CPU monitor.
Either way, expect to be able to run significantly less instances if you use a zero setting, and have increasingly noticeable latency above a 1x setting. (Try to play a rapid repeating note, at the highest settings, and you should notice you have a harder time doing it because of the latency.. )
- KVRAF
- 3088 posts since 10 Nov, 2013 from Germany
OsTIrus:
Are all gain-levels settings:
* Common Global Master-Volume
* Global volume (linked to Midi cc7, not accessible via GUI)
* Output Gain setting in GUI
stored in a DAW project (they are not stored in patches)?
Are all gain-levels settings:
* Common Global Master-Volume
* Global volume (linked to Midi cc7, not accessible via GUI)
* Output Gain setting in GUI
stored in a DAW project (they are not stored in patches)?
-
- KVRAF
- 2057 posts since 16 Apr, 2004 from between my ears