Login

Efficient DAW to work with Acqua and Nebula

Tips & tricks, working results, technical support

Re: Efficient DAW to work with Acqua and Nebula

Postby mixmonkey » Mon Mar 14, 2016 3:23 pm

Thanks for the info.

Which Windows version would you recommend for optimal performance, assuming a 4th generation i7 processor?
mixmonkey
User Level III
User Level III
 
Posts: 35
Joined: Sat Aug 29, 2015 2:34 pm

Re: Efficient DAW to work with Acqua and Nebula

Postby namooz » Tue Mar 15, 2016 5:03 am

I wanted to reiterate on the Reaper/PT9 thing. I noticed an almost double efficiency between these two DAWS, but I was also going from 32 to 64 bit. That is probably the reason I'm sure, and forgot to mention it, but I was so thrilled to find out the improvement, it didn't matter!

Cheers.
namooz
User Level VI
User Level VI
 
Posts: 68
Joined: Mon Dec 30, 2013 3:07 am

Re: Efficient DAW to work with Acqua and Nebula

Postby jfjer379@gmail.com » Tue Mar 15, 2016 11:48 am

i think the most intressting question right now would be what version of windows is the most efficient since i think we can say windows is the winner vs osx

Reaper on windows is the winner if we sum it together

so what win version is the winner ?

im most interested in 5 and 6 gen cpu`s
they outclass 4rth gen cpu`s with acquas and Nebula and doesent cost much more
so a 4rt gen cpu at this point in time im seeing as a waste of money

my upgrade will be the 5820k or a 6 or 8 core skylake
the skylake decition depends on how much better it performs compared to the 5820k of course and 6-8 core versions wont be released before summer 2016
i7 5820k • RME • Reaper64 • Win7 64 Pro • Amethyst • Coral • Emerald • Honey • Ivory • LIME • Navy • Pearl • Pink • Pink Comp Bundle • Sand • White2 • Nebula3 Server
User avatar
jfjer379@gmail.com
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 959
Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2013 1:22 pm

Re: Efficient DAW to work with Acqua and Nebula

Postby mixmonkey » Tue Mar 15, 2016 6:01 pm

Jfjer, do you have some comparative evidence that shows the increase in performance in Nebula using 5th or 6th generation processors over 4th generation?

or is it just wishful thinking and hearsay?

I rather think that Nebula's issues on OS X have more to do with coding for that particular environment than lack of processor muscle. Hopefully, Giancarlo will devote the necessary resources to rectify this situation.

Perhaps one day the pro audio world will adopt Reaper on Win7 as it's platform of choice, but that isn't where we are now.
mixmonkey
User Level III
User Level III
 
Posts: 35
Joined: Sat Aug 29, 2015 2:34 pm

Re: Efficient DAW to work with Acqua and Nebula

Postby Avgatzeblouz » Tue Mar 15, 2016 6:11 pm

namooz wrote:I wanted to reiterate on the Reaper/PT9 thing. I noticed an almost double efficiency between these two DAWS, but I was also going from 32 to 64 bit. That is probably the reason I'm sure, and forgot to mention it, but I was so thrilled to find out the improvement, it didn't matter!

Cheers.


Yes, Protools is night and day on Windows between version 9 and 10/11.
Avgatzeblouz
Vip Member
Vip Member
 
Posts: 400
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 4:13 pm

Re: Efficient DAW to work with Acqua and Nebula

Postby jfjer379@gmail.com » Wed Mar 16, 2016 3:49 am

mixmonkey wrote:Jfjer, do you have some comparative evidence that shows the increase in performance in Nebula using 5th or 6th generation processors over 4th generation?

or is it just wishful thinking and hearsay?

I rather think that Nebula's issues on OS X have more to do with coding for that particular environment than lack of processor muscle. Hopefully, Giancarlo will devote the necessary resources to rectify this situation.

Perhaps one day the pro audio world will adopt Reaper on Win7 as it's platform of choice, but that isn't where we are now.


i do absolutely don't think its wishful thinking

i wish it was

and this matters just as much if its window or osx

can you be right in the coding on osx could be better, absolutely but what gen cpu you are using is more important for running many Nebula and Acqua instanses

im talking to guys that use the 5820k here on the AA forum and on GS that can run 30 of Navys for example in ZL with everything engaged and still have incredible much juice left

BasariStudios can run 30 Navy in ZL with everything engaged in the plugin running audio trough every single instance on 256 buffersise and only hit 20% cpu

5820k is a 6 core 3,3 ghz cpu

im running a mac i7 quad 3rd gen 2,2 ghz and i max completely out at 2 instances of Navy in ZL

yeah 5820k has much better specs but not nearly 40 times better muscle on paper, but still it performs at least 40 times better(possibly even better), what other possibly reason than the type of gen cpu could cause this ?

when you look at those numbers you know its not just about the GHZ, if it was the 5820k would not be about 40 times or more faster than my mac I7 quad

everyone i have talked to that got theyre self a 5ft gen cpu are really really happy, and they tell me this is the best bang for the buck computer performance vs price for acquas and Nebula you can get

i dont hear about 4rt gen cpu'`s anymore,
there has to be a reason for that



its not a hard fact evidence i know but everything points in that direction when you crunch the numbers

what else do you suggest it could be ?


if 6th gen cpu
is is much better than 5th remains to see
biggest reason i consider 6th gen is that its newer and its no chance its a worse machine than the 5ft gen


i actually hope G and his team can confirm this with hard evidence for once so there will be no more confusion about this

but there is no doubt in my mind that the gen version of your cpu is a big factor with acquas and Nebula, 3rd gen cpu`S has been week for a long time, and i think acustica is taking advantages in the newer tech found in newer cpu`s
i7 5820k • RME • Reaper64 • Win7 64 Pro • Amethyst • Coral • Emerald • Honey • Ivory • LIME • Navy • Pearl • Pink • Pink Comp Bundle • Sand • White2 • Nebula3 Server
User avatar
jfjer379@gmail.com
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 959
Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2013 1:22 pm

Re: Efficient DAW to work with Acqua and Nebula

Postby RJHollins » Wed Mar 16, 2016 5:05 am

From what I can understand, the CPU gen is a dynamic aspect built within Nebula/Acqua, and this goes beyond the typical 'clock speed' or threads ...

I'm not a 'computer expert', but from discussion within the 'beta' team, we understand that levels of 'optimization' are built into the Neb/Acqua engine that are 'switched in' based on the CPU design/Gen. Back in the day it might have been known as SSE instructions [don't know what they call it today].

My personal experiences, having recently built a 5820K based machine is that, compared to my old, it is much more than clock speed or threads. This by a significant factor.

My main work is Mastering, so much of my Nebula/Acqua list happens on a single stereo track, and by that, the load distribution is more restricted [compared to a multi-track session].

In normal use, I don't have over-load issue ... that is not to say that I CAN'T over-do it [running multiple NEBS in TIMED mode on a signal track ... but that takes a lot of doing].

2. I don't use any Zero-latency versions, so that is a consideration I can't speak to.

3. We can/will always need faster/more powerful computers ... I just hope that its' still many years from now for me [I hate having to build and reload a new system from scratch ... way to much down time].

4. For those in the hunt, It's been said that the 5820K is 'bang for the buck'. I tried to make a good purchase decision, and I learned this phase AFTER my purchase [which took some of the sting out of being forced to new-build].

I was also forced to move to a 64-bit WIN-7 Op System, and with that, threw in 16 GIGs of RAM.

The other 'benefit' ... by starting with a new system .... all the massive collection of ALGO plugin's that are NOT installed :lol: Now that I don't see them in my EFX list ... all that spent money is not a daily reminder :twisted: :roll:

All in all ... its been the best thing to happen for my work. No more multi-versions of 'frozen' tracks to maintain ... everything real-time, fully NEB/Acqua based with a rare algo or three.

Lastly ... I've moved heavily to REAPER as my base DAW [customized]. I still have several other DAW's for specifics or convenience.

Not sure if this interested anyone, or is useful ... but thought to share a few comments/observations.
i7-5820k, MSI X99A Plus, 16 GIG Ram, Noctua NH-D14, Win-7 Pro [64-bit], Reaper-64

NVC [Nebula Virtual Controllers]
RJHollins
Beta Tester
Beta Tester
 
Posts: 2626
Joined: Sun Mar 28, 2010 5:53 pm

Re: Efficient DAW to work with Acqua and Nebula

Postby jfjer379@gmail.com » Wed Mar 16, 2016 8:12 am

RJHollins

Thanks so much
very interesting indeed

very few have written about the cpu generations so many thanks

i think that help many more people to decide
when they have made up their mind to make that big upgrade that really counts and why they should chose one cpu over another

i also hope Acustica could make a comment on this and if those of us that has waited so long to upgrade would get a benefit from going skylake or if 5820k still is the best to aim for

im sure Acustica know what potential hides in the skylake
if there are any compared to the 5ft gen

please enlighten us on this acustica :D



im so tired running out of cpu hehe
so im looking forward to mix normal again like i once used to but with the Superior sound of Acustica :)
the algos just don't do it for me


of course for many 4th gen is still enough it all depend on the needs

just to make it clear i didn't mean that a 4th gen cpu is a bad cpu
it still beats my 3rd gen cpu to death many many times :)



i think it was your words MR. RJHollins that actually convinced me to try Reaper hehe :)

i was not sure if i was gonna commit to it because i had heard the midi was bad, well all rumors isn't always true

i dont feel the midi is bad at all for my use
im not super deep with midi editing though, i always record midi instruments as its a live performance , practice the instrument and playing
so it feels natural before editing and mixing
that always saves time for me

so just how deep the midi goes i dont really know

i actually hope someone that uses midi on a deeper level can comment on that one with this incredible program :)

if i just miss a note or something small i edit it as long as the overall feel is there and 98% sounds good

to strictly program instruments can actually take longer time learning than to learn to play actually. at least for me, but there are of course many talented guys that can do that and do it very fast, im just to old school i think for that hehe


i actually miss Reaper when im producing in Logic now so with my latest project i had to move to Reaper when i was halfway trough hehe
when your CPU is a 3rd gen like mine you constantly run out of juice
the superior freeze in Reaper makes my life much easier while i wait for my computer upgrade

I actually recommend everyone trying Reaper after this experience with it and im a long time logic user
i have also tried studio one, pro tools and cubase in the past
no one have been a problem learning including Reaper

in Reaper
get trough the routing, learn to set up your projects in folders and customize the mixer to your liking
do a couple of mixes and you already is starting to get very familiar

the DAW is actually very good
its just a little unusual in the routing in the beginning, but but overcome a couple of these unusual things
one of them actually being an advantage because is so customizable , but the customizable part can actually throw you off a little at the beginning so just have some little patience and you will get a big reward for that patience in the end
and you easy forget what was so unusual as you only need to learn it once ;)


this i fear was very boring reading for you guys that didn't fall asleep haha but i wont mention it again

Cheers good folks :)
i7 5820k • RME • Reaper64 • Win7 64 Pro • Amethyst • Coral • Emerald • Honey • Ivory • LIME • Navy • Pearl • Pink • Pink Comp Bundle • Sand • White2 • Nebula3 Server
User avatar
jfjer379@gmail.com
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 959
Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2013 1:22 pm

Re: Efficient DAW to work with Acqua and Nebula

Postby mixmonkey » Wed Mar 16, 2016 5:36 pm

Many thanks for the enlightening comments folks.

It's made it clear to me that the real performance divide here is between OS X and Windows, and within OS X between VST and AAX/AU.

Of course, newer processors with more cores and refined instruction sets will all enhance performance, but I can't help thinking that GC's awesome base code is being crippled by a poor OS X implementation. Maybe it's time to give Xcode a whirl, eh? :D

When I get a chance I'll do a Win7 64 install on my existing hardware and check out the differences in both PT and Reaper. I'm not in a position to be able to drop PT on OS X (not if I want to eat!), but it should throw some light on the performance gap between the OSs.
mixmonkey
User Level III
User Level III
 
Posts: 35
Joined: Sat Aug 29, 2015 2:34 pm

Re: Efficient DAW to work with Acqua and Nebula

Postby jfjer379@gmail.com » Thu Mar 17, 2016 4:23 am

what would be cool to know now is if there is any gain
using win 10 64bit over win 7 64bit

if anybody know please do tell :)

to me every little gain in performance count

i really like my win 7 though and i hate upgrades haha

so i hope its not a big difference between them hehe

Cheers good folks
i7 5820k • RME • Reaper64 • Win7 64 Pro • Amethyst • Coral • Emerald • Honey • Ivory • LIME • Navy • Pearl • Pink • Pink Comp Bundle • Sand • White2 • Nebula3 Server
User avatar
jfjer379@gmail.com
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 959
Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2013 1:22 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Working with Nebula

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 5 guests