|
Ok so I got a laptop today, question about isolating Fl Studio.
|
View this Thread in Original format
| DJ Robby Rox |
If you don't want to read all this, just skip to the last sentence and at least please answer that question, thanks.
___________________________________________________
(rant begin)
I need to get a new desk first, I've actually taken my mind off the idea of getting a new synth of any sort. I'm still not even happy with my computer setup 100%. I AM finally getting happier with my skills by the day, and I AM also becoming more concerned with computer power over synth power. Just lately my obsession with synths has largely subsided, I'm getting sounds I'm happy with for once, but I'm not able to do as much as I want, due to cpu resources. I find myself shorting on too many sounds leaving them in a sort of "handicapped" state.
My question is this, I'm doing another reformat then just intalling Fl Studio back onto my desktop (yes I just did this in Jan). Than I'm moving all my /crap files to my laptop (its actually an upgraded older laptop of mine that my brother had "borrowed" for a year in excellent condition still, he upgraded it then gave it back to me finally which was cool). So no virtual machine bs, 2 seperate computers like I was finally hoping.
I did what you guys recommended first and got the 4 gigs of memory. It helped a lot of course with Nexus & DirectWave, but Nexus is still using so much effn CPU I've decided isolating FL Studio is my next step to conserve cpu. And I AM SHUTTING off Nexus's delay and reverb now and just using sends, (even though I consider this a "sacrifice" more than a "preference") so I'm not exactly understanding how Nexus is still raping my cpu like it is (I'm also not using presets on nexus they are usually always the ram based samples [as they are always slow to load]). And yes I'm smart disabling and using sends wisely for reverbs. I can often increase latency as far as it will go with still only a minimal improvement. So I'll be stripping my computer of everything except FL, no internet, no msword or even anti-virus.
For people who have done this, does a dedicated computer help *significantly* with speed? I can use anywhere between 6-8 Nexus, and multiple vsts, say maybe another 6-8 vsts on top of that and I'm finished. My computer gets to around 70%, starts bouncing and locking up/freezing. I can use Nexus for the smallest sounds but I still need it open as bouncing is not a technique I like to use, it murders inspiration for me. I'd rather spend the money for more power than bounce tbo. I use Nexus mainly for getting a dense bass sound or certain overtone, sometimes I'll layer blue over it, sometimes I'll use it alone. But I'm maxing my cpu out again and have only installed like 4-5 new programs after my recent format. (xilosoft dvd burner (crack), photoshop (crack), avg free version (legit), dreamweaver (crack), vuze and all the microsoft office programs etc). I tried using the virtual machine for a bit but naturally I stopped using it and ruined my computer again.
My question is, what is more likely to slow a computer down, cracked software (which I swore off at one point but gave into as I'm simply just not a moral enough person and its almost like an addiction to me) I just need a certain amount of synths to work with, and the fact is I can't afford all of them. I wouldn't just "not buy them" I'd stop producing all together and because thats not happening, cracking becomes a neccessity. So it seems impossible for me to keep cracked software off my main production computer, even if I only kept music production software on it.
I'm mainly afraid this is going to happen:
I strip/format my pc, install FL Studio and register legitimately, install my other legit vsts (sylenth, z3ta, sytrus, etc) but theres no way I can produce without Nexus and Trilian, vangard, blue and albino (all ripped). Sorry Mr. Papen I promise one day when I get more money I'll reimburse you my brother). I also use sylenth and sytrus more anyway so I don't really feel like a crook, robs synths get used much more sparingly because I never got into programming them. Ok I'm a crook.. its got to be obvious I'm trying to justify it.
I don't know what to do. I wound up spending a lot of the money I put away for my studio on bills, so my funds are limited now, around $5-600. But whats the point of updating my computer any further if cracked software is going to ruin it all again?
Or is this NOT my problem?
All I know is I was expecting a lot more power from my core 2, even the first day it was all new I was expecting a larger improvement from my pentium d switch. Sure it was impressing, but just not what I was expecting from the reviews. From a pentium d I was first expecting almost double an increase in speed. Then common sense told me no way, hopefully I'll get at least a 25% increase (this was after doing a bit of reading too). And at most I've gotten around 10-15% increase overall.
Knowing that, I would have never replaced my pentium d with a "faster" core2 chip and have saved up for something huge.
I just don't know what the weakest link is in the chain thats killing my speed:
1) motherboard (its a cheaper Asus P5GC VM, was like $140 I think back a few years ago, I know mobo's play very little role in speed [I think] but just figured I'd mention. I also heard Asus is in something like the top 10% of mobos on the market)
2) core 2 duo E7400 - this processor is suppose to be among one of the quickest of the core 2 duo's, I think they only go up to the E8600.
3) Too many legit/non legit programs on my computer
4) Too many non legit vsts (which is really only like 5 at this point).
I eliminated virus's as number 5 because even though theres cracked software on my computer nothing is scanning for viruses. I know that doesn't mean my pc is 100% clean, but this has become such a ritualistic behavoir I'm thinking it can't be viruses anymore, maybe just the way drivers from cracked software intefere with your computers native drivers (I'm guessing, idk wtf I'm actually talking about). Just after I format my computer, at some point it always goes back to . Yet I almost never seem to get normal symptoms of an actual virus. I'm assuming its the software but even before I started putting cracked back on, it still wasn't any kind of "miracle computer". Right after the format to be honest I still wasn't happy with my speed. Better? Sure. Much more content with it? Absolutely. Happy? Def not.
I've heard guys say the core2duo should be quick enough for my needs. But I feel like I'm going in circles here, EVEN after my recent format, sure my computer worked a bit quicker, but I still felt very limited with my cpu resources. I like to open synths for small stupid sounds and automations, I am a spoiled producer like that.
Last time I formatted I just cleaned out all the cracked software, and formatted the drive, but I did put common legitimate programs back on (like avg 9.0, ms word, adobe, etc). All I'll be doing differently now is just installing xp, then FL Studio, all my legitimate vsts and nothing else.
But if my computer is STILL SLOW at this point that would HAVE TO MEAN its my processor right? Just verifying cause I'm no computer wiz. And please no "switch to ableton" crap, I'm too experienced with FL at this point it wouldn't make sense to switch although I have considered it before.
I really never thought a faster core 2 duo would be so g/damn slow, I know I have other things going on, but maybe I'm just too spoiled the way I produce.
I want unlimited access to CPU, is anyone running a quad core on FL? Hows the speed? And FL wouldn't even support 4 cores or did they changed that in update 9?
I don't know I just see myself getting minimal increases in cpu speed by going through all this work, then getting a new cpu anyway in the end. I'm not even sure whats the fastest processor that FL supports. If anyone knows let me know.
________________________________________________
Skip to point: If this thread triggered you to wanna flame me in anyway (because you actually read it) just do me a favor, ignore it, and accept the fact that I just AM an ignorant person.
But I AM very curious what processor the majority of producers are working with here. Especially FL users. I don't see a lot of threads about people bitching about speed the way I do, and I'm thinking the problem is the way I think about producing.
I have always considered a core2duo a sort of "industry standard" processor for anyone semi serious about producing, but I'm starting to think thats not even slightly true, and that a core2duo realistically is more the "industry minimum" processor for music production. I don't wanna go through swishes and fxs in my sample pack and try to equalize and filter them to make them sound like they fit (when they usually don't) so I can conserve cpu, rather then open up a 3 noise synths, 5 crazy fxs and go crazy tweaking (which usually always works and sounds cleaner in the end). A producer shouldn't need to make sacrifices like this.
If I want 3 master channels (3 buses really that sounds kinda stupid lol), each with its own Maximus and its own settings for each channel, I shouldn't need to downgrade and just use 1 channel on the main master... then try to make the whole track fit in that one channel with Maximus. I ALWAYS get better results dividing using buses, and treating different elements in thier own channels with their own specific settings.
I'm most definitely just ranting at this point but I'll finish it off here.
What processors are you guys working with out there? I really am curious. I've though about changing my production techniques but that DESTROYS my inspiration like nothing else. I need power, as much as I can get. Thanks guys. I'm not talking about sound cards and audio interfaces, I'm talking about cpu here. What are most of you working with? Thanks again gents. :happy2: |
|
|
| owien |
| quote: | Originally posted by DJ Robby Rox
I can use Nexus for the smallest sounds but I still need it open as bouncing is not a technique I like to use, it murders inspiration for me. |
then just use nexus as your key synth and pull on samples for the rest that way you can get creative as you want without maxing out the pc.
until you gt a pc that will meet your needs then this way will help out ;) |
|
|
| orTofønChiLd |
| holy who's gonna read all that |
|
|
| Eric J |
| quote: | Originally posted by DJ Robby Rox
What processors are you guys working with out there?
|
Dual, Dual core XEON 2.66 for a total of 4 physical processors.
| quote: | Originally posted by DJ Robby Rox
I need power, as much as I can get. Thanks guys.
|
Keep in mind that your computer's overall speed is not just limited by CPU. The motherboard bus speed and memory speed also can have a profound effect on your computer overall performance. You can have the fastest processors in the world, but those processors still need to be able to send data back and forth to the RAM and hard disk and that's where fast RAM and bus speeds come in.
Fast processors with slow RAM or slow motherboard bus speed will not provide nearly the performance boost.
| quote: | Originally posted by DJ Robby Rox
I'm not talking about sound cards and audio interfaces, I'm talking about cpu here. |
Do not discount the effect that an audio interface can have on your computers performance when handling audio. Besides having well-written drivers that have been tested for demanding audio performance, higher end sound cards come with DSP chips that take the task of processing audio out of the hands of your computer processor and move it to the audio interface on board DSP, thereby freeing up your computer CPU for other tasks.
| quote: | Originally posted by DJ Robby Rox
What are most of you working with?
|
Mac Pro. The Mac Pro class of machine are server-class machine utilizing server-class hardware. That means fast processors, fast RAM (fully buffered), fast motherboards (custom designed by Intel for Apple) and SATA backplane for disk I/O.
Now I'm assuming you want to remain on the PC platform and don't want to shell out for a Mac. So then you need to make sure that when considering new components for your machine, you need to consider factors such as motherboard bus speed and memory speed to gain maximum performance boost and take full advantage of your faster processors.
In addition, laptop components are almost always slower than their desktop counterparts. The reasons for this are mostly surrounding a need to make the components smaller and consume less power in order to lower the power demands of the system and increase battery life.
Furthermore, cheap laptops (and desktops), take shortcuts like using IGP graphics chips which steal system RAM instead of utilizing dedicated video RAM. This means less RAM for your system because a chunk of it is being sliced off for the video card.
If you need maximum power and can afford to sacrifice portability, then a desktop machine is always going to be a superior choice for a production DAW, especially if you are building yuor own.
As far as software is concerned, just having cracked software on your system is not going to slow the system down unless it is running, so as long as you arent running these programs at the same time as your DAW package then you should not see a performance decrease. Where the danger of cracked software lies is that you do not know what other, hidden processes or malware may be installed along with the cracked software, and those hidden processes may be stealing system resources and you have no way of knowing it.
The only way to be sure you don't have any malware or hidden processes running in the background is to install only legitimate software on your DAW machine and leave it just for producing. Do not install any other software on it and leave it disconnected from the internet as much as possible. Save your other stuff for a second machine. |
|
|
| evo8 |
i7 870 2.93ghz on a Gigabyte GA-P55A UD4
6gb Corsair Value Select DDR3 PC3-10666 1333Mhz for memory
Got one of those Intel SSD drives as well and have Win 7 64 bit loaded on it
For an audio interface i have a MOTU Ultralite
It takes as much as i can throw at it, usually couple of instances of each of the following ....Alchemy, Trilian, Predator, z3ta, impOSCar, EOS reverb, Arts Acoustic reverb, SIR2 reverb impulses and some other fx plus my UAD1 & 2
Dont underestimate the audio interface in your ability to run as much stuff as possible - i used to have an EMU 1212 and whilst the sound was grand it was prone to bottlenecking everything else - i cant see a mention of your audio interface anywhere, 2.8ghz is fairly fast, my last chip was 3ghz quad core and it ran pretty much all i threw at it too
what i used to do with XP was have 2 partitions, each with a copy of XP loaded - one partition for music production only - the other for anything else
my pc rarely gets on the net - only for syncrosoft updates etc
and buy your synths, there are some great deals out there these days - keep an eye on the for sale sections on music production forums - soft synths are always changing hands |
|
|
| tehlord |
My old setup was an Athlon X2 6000/2 gigs/XP 32 and I seemed to have less speed issues than you.
My newer setup is a Q9450/4 gigs/XP 32 and I can run my current 45 channel multi VST project at about 30% CPU although I do have my Powercore covering most of the compression duties. |
|
|
| Morvan |
Some FX Plug-ins really are performance killers, go and list them all up.
At what latency are you working? |
|
|
| DJ Robby Rox |
I was thinking about getting this little bundle right here.
http://www.tigerdirect.com/applicat...0067&CatId=1599
With the core2quad 8300 has a bench mark almost double what mine isn now on the duo. Plus you can overclock this mobo and my current mobo can't be overclocked so I'd be gaining A LOT of speed I think.
I mean for $230 it looks like that alone can double my speed. What do you guys think? Thanks |
|
|
| Subtle |
| AMD Phenom II X4 3,4 GHZ |
|
|
| DJ Robby Rox |
| quote: | Originally posted by Subtle
AMD Phenom II X4 3,4 GHZ |
Benchmarked at 4,317 for $179 but my current mobo only supports intel. The Q8300 was clocked at 3,571, overclocked it prob actually surpasses the AMD.
The combo deals with the Phenoms start at $80 more, and the reviews on the intel stuff always seems better imo.
So practically speaking, you're getting about the same speed for $80-$200 more going with the AMD (depending on what mobo specs you're going for). I'd rather stick with Intel because 1, my brother the tech geek/genius I always refer to says Intel has a better reputation and he hears a lot of people complaining about AMDs underperforming in his business. Saying that Intels usually outperform AMDs with similar specs.
Again, this obviously is all 100% bias, and based on almost nothing. But I think I'm gonna go for the intel deal. Still not sure. |
|
|
| DJ Robby Rox |
| quote: | Originally posted by Subtle
AMD Phenom II X4 3,4 GHZ |
I am rather curious though how much work can you throw at that thing?
Or should I ask "how often do you find yourself craving more processing power?" lol I know it depends cause everyone works different but I want something thats not gonna choke if I throw a fairly heavy workload at it. Say about 20-25 "average" or "moderate" cpu killing vsts, 40-50fx (3 usually maximus alone which eats a lot), 5-10 rompler/vsts.. I don't think I could ever see myself really getting past that point.
My last project alone was 12 vsts, 8 nexus, about 20-25 random fx (2 maximus and about 4 native FL Reverbs, the rest of 20-25 fx was maybe about 8 equalizers, 4-5 delays, a couple distortion and overdrive units) and my computer was finished, could not tolerate it so I shutdown Fl and just stopped. |
|
|
| aLviNx80 |
I've been running an AMD Phemon II x4 2.8g processor on my computer and haven't had any bit of problems..
core2duo's should run fine.. I don't know what your problem is.. I used to run an AMD 2x 2.4g(which is much slower than yours) before my current one, and that worked fine for me as well.
as far as your programs and vst's.. cracked or not crack, I doubt it has any impact on ur speed issue.
as mentioned above..
what audio interface are you using..? |
|
|
|
|
