The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
 Search This Thread  Search This Forum  Search Reviews  Search Gear Database  Search Gear for sale  Search Gearslutz Go Advanced
Slate Digital/RTAS performance in PT9 DAW Software
Old 2nd January 2011
  #1
Question Slate Digital/RTAS performance in PT9

I've been noticing a few weird things with Slate Digital plug-ins in PT9. I'm wondering if anyone has noticed any of these problems I'm experiencing.

First off, FG-X:

OK, I'm using a kickass i7 computer. In PT9, this plug-in is ALWAYS at 50% no matter what the playback engine is set at. If I switch over to Sonar 8.5, I'll see CPU usage change as I lower and raise the buffer. In PT9 it is always pegged at 50% unless I remove FG-X, then CPU usage drops down to 10% and never goes higher than 33% the entire session. Something else that's interesting: I cannot have FG-X in a PT session without glitches unless I set the buffer at 512 or higher. Very strange since I can use it in Sonar with the buffer at 32 and even use it during tracking. Once the load increases I raise the buffer to 64 and finish the session. No way in hell could I do that in PT9. Does this mimic any else's experiences? I've heard RTAS is poorer performace than VST, but this seems pretty extreme. This is using the most recent version of FG-X: 1.1.2.

Now Trigger:

The problem I've having with Trigger is so strange that it had me questioning my sanity. I put an instance of trigger on both my kick and snare track. Occasionally I'll notice my snare is all of a sudden blasting at a ridiculous volume. I'll mute the snare track and still hear it coming through LOUD AND CLEAR with NO ACTIVITY on the track meters, only on the master fader. No pre-fader sends, no careless routing. What I found after lots of muting and unmuting was that the snare triggered track was coming through on my kick trigger track (both kick and snare triggers playing through the kick track) with every track muted (except kick) I was still hearing the snare. Raise the buffer, close the session and reopen-- everything is back to normal. Again, this is using the newest version of Trigger 1.64. I've been hit by this 3 times now and it is extremely annoying.

I am experiencing one other (non Slate-Digital) plug-in issue and that is Waves IR-L. I can't use it without glitches unless I set the buffer at 128 or higher (which works perfectly in Sonar at a buffer of 64). Is RTAS really this bad? It's hard to believe since the rest of my plug-ins barely affect the CPU at all. Not like it's a huge inconvenience to keep shuffling buffer settings, but it is annoying for sure since I have to restart PT every time.

Any feedback is appreciated.thumbsup
Old 3rd January 2011
  #2
Slate Pro Audio / Slate Digital
 
Steven Slate's Avatar
 

Hi dave, thanks for posting. We only recently got PT9 so we're working on bugfixes. Make sure to post your exact system config in your ticket. We'll get things patched up!
Old 7th January 2011
  #3
Gear Head
 
Radiorockstar's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveE View Post
I've been noticing a few weird things with Slate Digital plug-ins in PT9. I'm wondering if anyone has noticed any of these problems I'm experiencing.

First off, FG-X:

OK, I'm using a kickass i7 computer. In PT9, this plug-in is ALWAYS at 50% no matter what the playback engine is set at. If I switch over to Sonar 8.5, I'll see CPU usage change as I lower and raise the buffer. In PT9 it is always pegged at 50% unless I remove FG-X, then CPU usage drops down to 10% and never goes higher than 33% the entire session. Something else that's interesting: I cannot have FG-X in a PT session without glitches unless I set the buffer at 512 or higher. Very strange since I can use it in Sonar with the buffer at 32 and even use it during tracking. Once the load increases I raise the buffer to 64 and finish the session. No way in hell could I do that in PT9. Does this mimic any else's experiences? I've heard RTAS is poorer performace than VST, but this seems pretty extreme. This is using the most recent version of FG-X: 1.1.2.
Same experience for me. No matter the buffer, FG-X is locking down 45-50% of my CPU. Running Pro Tools, RTAS, 8 Core 2.26 Nehalem with 16 GB of RAM. Seems uncalled for.

Also this is not specific to Pro Tools 9! I am currently using Pro Tools 9, but have been using Pro Tools 8.x for 6 months with FG-X with the same result. I'm just getting frustrated and tired of waiting for an update to resolve this issue.
Old 7th January 2011
  #4
Yeah, I guess I've become spoiled since FGX worked so well in Sonar/VST. I'd love to be able to get the same results with PT9.
Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearslutz Pro Audio Community!

Registration benefits include:
  • The ability to reply to and create new discussions
  • Access to members-only giveaways & competitions
  • Interact with VIP industry experts in our guest Q&As
  • Access to members-only sub forum discussions
  • Access to members-only Chat Room
  • Get INSTANT ACCESS to the world's best private pro audio Classifieds for only USD $20/year
  • Promote your eBay auctions and Reverb.com listings for free
  • Remove this message!
You need an account to post a reply. Create a username and password below and an account will be created and your post entered.


 
 
Slide to join now Processing…
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Similar Threads
Thread
Thread Starter / Forum
Replies
jamison100 / Music Computers
4

Forum Jump
Forum Jump