The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
Sonarworks releases Reference 4!
Old 16th October 2017
  #61
Lives for gear
 
stella645's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by PettyCash View Post
And that's what makes the upgrade worth it for me...getting that plus getting a new low latency mode that will allow me to use the correction during production and recording sessions is potentially a game changer for that price.
I was possibly a bit uncharitable with my earlier comments re this being more like a 3.1. Let's call it 3.5 until the promised algo improvement comes and then it'll be worthy of the V4 title.
The zero latency seems to be working well and on my system cpu use is lower then V3....In fact at 44.1k cpu is negligible at around or less than 1%.

They also mention improvements to the measurement app and I have struggled to complete calibration before so will test this in the next few days.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mastervargas View Post
any of you guys who managed to upgrade checked how is the new zero latency filter's CPU usage? the low latency mode in Ref3 uses around 20% DSP on my i7 6700K in a 96KHz project.

C>
I work at 44.1 but just tried a quick test at 96k, Reaper, Win10, 5820k at 3.7Ghz and with the zero latency mode and my cpu use was between 2 and 3% - But before you get too excited I also tried V3 and my cpu was only around 4% on low latency mode....but even so this might lower your 20% to 10 or 15% I suppose.
Old 16th October 2017
  #62
Lives for gear
 
deuc647's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by stella645 View Post
Hey...I made the feels more like 3.1 statement already
The upgrade in your case also includes Systemwide.




Probably not...depending when you activated.

https://www.sonarworks.com/reference/upgrade-policy
Ive actually had it for about 8 months and havent activated it yet.
Old 17th October 2017
  #63
Quote:
Originally Posted by stella645 View Post
The zero latency seems to be working well and on my system cpu use is lower then V3....In fact at 44.1k cpu is negligible at around or less than 1%.

They also mention improvements to the measurement app and I have struggled to complete calibration before so will test this in the next few days.

I work at 44.1 but just tried a quick test at 96k, Reaper, Win10, 5820k at 3.7Ghz and with the zero latency mode and my cpu use was between 2 and 3% - But before you get too excited I also tried V3 and my cpu was only around 4% on low latency mode....but even so this might lower your 20% to 10 or 15% I suppose.
that's great info. thanks!

... man, that 5820K must be a beast. I'm really kickin' myself for going with the 6700K. too late now, different Mobo ...Oh, well.

EDIT: where those % actual CPU usage or what Reaper says it eats? I guess it depends on the DAW used, mine says 21% with low latency at 96K and 9% with mixed phase, but the actual CPU in resource monitor is 10% and 8% respectively.
important thing is that Ref4 seems to be better in that aspect. I was afraid by making it zero lat. it will be a even bigger CPU hog for me.

C.
Old 17th October 2017
  #64
Lives for gear
 
stella645's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by mastervargas View Post

EDIT: where those % actual CPU usage or what Reaper says it eats? I guess it depends on the DAW used, mine says 21% with low latency at 96K and 9% with mixed phase, but the actual CPU in resource monitor is 10% and 8% respectively.
important thing is that Ref4 seems to be better in that aspect. I was afraid by making it zero lat. it will be a even bigger CPU hog for me.

C.
Reaper and windows resource were reporting about the same.

But this was at 1024 buffer on the interface...didn't think to change that...I'll try again at low settings tomorrow. Need sleep now.
Old 17th October 2017
  #65
Gear Nut
 
Rusty Falcon's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by ceemusic View Post
On checkout I get this--
Same thing tonight lol....

Following up to add that I was able to purchase the upgrade to SWREF4 successfully. On travel right now but am going to install and use this weekend for certain!

Last edited by Rusty Falcon; 20th October 2017 at 01:18 AM.. Reason: Update
Old 17th October 2017
  #66
Lives for gear
It says it it coming out tomorrow. This is why you can't buy it today.....
Old 17th October 2017
  #67
M2E
Lives for gear
 
M2E's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by stella645 View Post
it's all in here:

https://www.sonarworks.com/reference/upgrade-policy

For you it's free - Just click the upgrade button and enter the activation keys for each of your products.
Thanks, this helped a lot but they also hit me up with my serials as you need that to upgrade.

They just sent me back what I needed so... I'm good.
Will update tonight...

Thanks,

Marc
Old 17th October 2017
  #68
Gear Nut
 

Still no EQ presets implementing the Harman curve? We may design speakers so they have as flat a response as possible at measuring points in an anechoic chamber when "listening" with a microphone, but when you have a real person with 2 ears, a head and a torso in even a well treated room - then what you hear (i.e., diffuse field) basically matches the Harman curve (and not flat frequency response). Now I don't doubt that writing a software filter to try and force a flat frequency response in headphones could probably sound better compared to the net frequency/phase response is of a preamp/headphone combination in a project studio with impedance issues, etc. - but that does not mean flat frequency response should be the reference. Are there any engineers at Sonarworks who know about Sean Olive's (AES published) research? This has been out for a while. Granted we can't all EQ our headphones to the Harman curve by ear like Bob Katz can do (I don't think he uses Sonarworks software). But why not make the Harman curve a preset in Sonarworks? Also using Sonarworks to create a flat response is going to ruin the deliberately engineered response of headphones that are designed to match the Harman curve (and forcing large changes in EQ to make then flat could add distortion). See
https://www.innerfidelity.com/conten...arget-response
and
https://www.innerfidelity.com/conten...phone-response
I don't think Tyl and Bob will mind if I excerpt this graph from their articles,
Attached Thumbnails
Sonarworks releases Reference 4!-innerfidelity_eq_to_harman_curve.jpg  
Old 17th October 2017
  #69
Here for the gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by mastervargas View Post
so basically not much.
and how is the CPU% on that new filter type? the min phase in Ref3 is a real CPU hog. it eats up over 20% in 96K on my last gen i7. this is the kinda tool you should set and forget, not impact on your workflow. it would be great to have a "regular" low on CPU min phase, as latency is not an issue for me, and I really don't want to use linear phase on room correction ...

C.
Yeah, this is a huge sticking point for me as well. Trying to mix my scoring template with systemwide or the plugin on is a $h!tshow. The current CPU use is brutal enough to be unusable in a composition scenario.

And user presets, or at least settings per speaker need to be a feature.
I have to reduce low end on my small speakers because of a 10dB null at 100 but can't save the setting with the speaker profile. Drives me nuts!

When are you guys going to make a monitor controller with onboard correction???!
Old 17th October 2017
  #70
Gear Addict
Quote:
Originally Posted by postfader View Post
Still no EQ presets implementing the Harman curve? We may design speakers so they have as flat a response as possible at measuring points in an anechoic chamber when "listening" with a microphone, but when you have a real person with 2 ears, a head and a torso in even a well treated room - then what you hear (i.e., diffuse field) basically matches the Harman curve (and not flat frequency response). Now I don't doubt that writing a software filter to try and force a flat frequency response in headphones could probably sound better compared to the net frequency/phase response is of a preamp/headphone combination in a project studio with impedance issues, etc. - but that does not mean flat frequency response should be the reference. Are there any engineers at Sonarworks who know about Sean Olive's (AES published) research? This has been out for a while. Granted we can't all EQ our headphones to the Harman curve by ear like Bob Katz can do (I don't think he uses Sonarworks software). But why not make the Harman curve a preset in Sonarworks? Also using Sonarworks to create a flat response is going to ruin the deliberately engineered response of headphones that are designed to match the Harman curve (and forcing large changes in EQ to make then flat could add distortion). See
https://www.innerfidelity.com/conten...arget-response
and
https://www.innerfidelity.com/conten...phone-response
I don't think Tyl and Bob will mind if I excerpt this graph from their articles,
https://www.gearslutz.com/board/12363274-post74.html
Old 17th October 2017
  #71
Here for the gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by markisha View Post
I really wish you implemented a "freeze" button or the possibility to export the correction curve as a preset for Q-Clone (or similar plugins).
High CPU usage is still a big issue for me.
I rely on Steinberg Nuendo's built in control room section, so each speaker output has it's own Sonarworks plugin, that's four instances in total, including headphones.
You just gave me an idea how to get around SW's brutal CPU and latency issues in Logic. (Should work with any low latency minimum phase match-EQ plugin, which Logic has natively...)

Play pink noise through the SW Reference plugin and capture it in match EQ's reference curve slot. Bypass the Reference plugin and capture the raw pink noise. Set to zero latency/Min. phase and Match 100%... Should do a decent enough job for composing, tracking, etc. Don't see why it wouldn't work with Pro-Q2 as well. Save the preset, recall and put last in your chain.

Should do a decent enough job when you need low latency and low CPU....

Which brings me to the point that if Logic's Match EQ can run with no visible CPU footprint, there has to be a way for them to bring latency and footprint down... From what I can tell it isn't doing much more than an inverse curve of peaks and nulls... (Maybe some delay related stuff, but kinda doubt it...) Just matters how high on their priority list they put it...
Old 17th October 2017
  #72
Gear Nut
 

Quote:
I don't get (or see anything published for) the science behind the post referenced by the above link (in reply to my previous post). The Harman curve is more than a few dB off from a flat response; the idea that perceptually this would be no different than providing a flat response does not make sense. Or, I don't believe that professional listeners with high quality headphones and preamps are cannot hear the difference between flat response and the Harman curve. If that were true, then I don't see how Bob Katz (a mastering engineer) was able to reproduce the Harman curve in the articles I cited.

Does a "custom" calibrated pair of headphones that you get from Sonarworks (for an extra $99) deviate from the compensated/flat response you get with the Sonarworks plugin - and/or somehow reproduce the Harman curve in a "perceptually" consistent way?

Sonarworks should publish this and the research behind it if this is the case; but I don't see anything mentioning perception and the Hamran curve on their web site or in any of their documentation that I can find.
Old 17th October 2017
  #73
Gear Nut
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by jayfett View Post
Play pink noise through the SW Reference plugin and capture it in match EQ's reference curve slot. Bypass the Reference plugin and capture the raw pink noise. Set to zero latency/Min. phase and Match 100%... Should do a decent enough job for composing, tracking, etc. Don't see why it wouldn't work with Pro-Q2 as well. Save the preset, recall and put last in your chain.

Should do a decent enough job when you need low latency and low CPU...
This is exactly what I've been doing since I bought version 3. It works very well while composing and tracking. And at mix down I just switch to Sonarworks to achieve the best audio quality.

Anyway, looking forward to try out v4!
Old 17th October 2017
  #74
Gear Addict
Hrodulf will correct me if I'm wrong, but as far as I understand it: when they say "flat" they mean "perceptually flat", using a target curve that, quote, "isn't too different from Olive-Welti". The FR graphs shown in the plugin are in fact corrected with respect to this curve. So, no, they don't correct the response of the headphones to measure flat, but to sound flat.

I'd love to see the science behind it too, but I guess that's their IP and they don't want to disclose it, which is understandable.
Old 17th October 2017
  #75
Quote:
Originally Posted by stella645 View Post
Reaper and windows resource were reporting about the same.

But this was at 1024 buffer on the interface...didn't think to change that...I'll try again at low settings tomorrow. Need sleep now.
I just upgrade too. zero latency is lighter on the CPU compared to low latecy on Ref3 so thanks for the info.

on the other hand DEVS, why on Earth would you loose the "Speaker/Headphone" switch?? was it in the way?? or am I blind and senile and can't find it. it was one click to move from speaker correction to headphone, with the profiles saved and automatically loaded for both. now every time I want to change that I have to go through win explorer, find the profile ...they're not in the same folder ...gezzzz!!
Old 17th October 2017
  #76
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by mastervargas View Post
why on Earth would you loose the "Speaker/Headphone" switch?? was it in the way?? or am I blind and senile and can't find it. it was one click to move from speaker correction to headphone, with the profiles saved and automatically loaded for both. now every time I want to change that I have to go through win explorer, find the profile ...they're not in the same folder ...gezzzz!!
+1
hope this is just an oversight, the switch feature needs to be there.
Old 17th October 2017
  #77
Gear Maniac
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by mastervargas View Post
that's great info. thanks!

... man, that 5820K must be a beast. I'm really kickin' myself for going with the 6700K. too late now, different Mobo ...Oh, well.

EDIT: where those % actual CPU usage or what Reaper says it eats? I guess it depends on the DAW used, mine says 21% with low latency at 96K and 9% with mixed phase, but the actual CPU in resource monitor is 10% and 8% respectively.
important thing is that Ref4 seems to be better in that aspect. I was afraid by making it zero lat. it will be a even bigger CPU hog for me.

C.
I don't use 96k, but I also have a 6700k and I don't have any performance problem at all with Ref3. I did not notice it much when Ref3 is active to be honest. The 5820k isn't faster in every case and in the best case only about 35%-40% or so.
Old 17th October 2017
  #78
Quote:
Originally Posted by AreYouHuman View Post
I don't use 96k, but I also have a 6700k and I don't have any performance problem at all with Ref3. I did not notice it much when Ref3 is active to be honest. The 5820k isn't faster in every case and in the best case only about 35%-40% or so.
huh. that's interesting. I'd have to investigate further, although Ref4 seems way more efficient ...maybe something wasn't OK with Ref3 on my system.
the weird thing is, and I'd sure like somebody from the company to chime if possible, is this: in Ref4 all three filter types use the same amount of CPU (at least on my system). they are cleverly renamed "zero latency" and "optimum" instead of minimum and mixed so I'm wondering what was changed, since in Ref3 there was a huge difference between minimum and mixed and now it seems constant. the filter type info bubble states zero latency requires a LOT of CPU but I don't see it. only tested 44K for now head to head with Ref3 (which is not uninstalled by the way when upgrading to Ref4 - info which should have been posted) so one can compare the to in the same project.

C.
Old 17th October 2017
  #79
Lives for gear
 
stella645's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by mastervargas View Post
the weird thing is, and I'd sure like somebody from the company to chime if possible, is this: in Ref4 all three filter types use the same amount of CPU (at least on my system). they are cleverly renamed "zero latency" and "optimum" instead of minimum and mixed so I'm wondering what was changed, since in Ref3 there was a huge difference between minimum and mixed and now it seems constant. the filter type info bubble states zero latency requires a LOT of CPU but I don't see it. only tested 44K for now head to head with Ref3 (which is not uninstalled by the way when upgrading to Ref4 - info which should have been posted) so one can compare the to in the same project.

C.
I think at 96k the difference in cpu use between modes is noticeable but as you say it just isn't that cpu hungry in any mode.
Old 17th October 2017
  #80
Gear Guru
So let me get this straight. I bought the headphone edition last year. It costs me 30 euros to be able to use on 3 computers, AND I have to spend $19- to upgrade??
Great way to punish longtime customers..... I'm so disappointed.... Are there any options for reselling?
Old 17th October 2017
  #81
Quote:
Originally Posted by stella645 View Post
I think at 96k the difference in cpu use between modes is noticeable but as you say it just isn't that cpu hungry in any mode.
may be but I'm comparing Ref3 and Ref4 head to head in 44.K and Ref3's minimum vs mixed is still a big diff. Ref4 is constant and way lower. so that's a plus. but that speaker/headphone switch is baffling ... why would they loose that?
these constant GUI upgrades are such a waste of time IMO. if somebody does audio for a living the last thing you need are buttons or switches moved or replaced ... labels renamed. if you get used to an interface the last thing you need is readjusting, unless something is wrong and the change is per customer request or to correct something ... like the white interface would be. can't think of anything more fatiguing than a white background.
Old 17th October 2017
  #82
Lives for gear
 
stella645's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ardis View Post
So let me get this straight. I bought the headphone edition last year. It costs me 30 euros to be able to use on 3 computers, AND I have to spend $19- to upgrade??
Great way to punish longtime customers..... I'm so disappointed.... Are there any options for reselling?
They are throwing in systemwide for that price....but if that's of no interest, then yeah, not a great deal.
I'm guessing systemwide was a long way from the successful seller they hoped and so they're bundling it now to justify the upgrade charge.

And yes they allow license transfers.
Old 17th October 2017
  #83
Gear Guru
Quote:
Originally Posted by stella645 View Post
They are throwing in systemwide for that price....but if that's of no interest, then yeah, not a great deal.
I'm guessing systemwide was a long way from the successful seller they hoped and so they're bundling it now to justify the upgrade charge.

And yes they allow license transfers.
Yeah not really interested in anything more and recommended this to others, so am feeling bad about that. Do you know if they charge for license transfers? Not really sure if that's even worth doing at this point....I can't believe that this will cost almost as much as I paid for it, to upgrade and get on more than one computer.....

Feeling ripped off......
Old 17th October 2017
  #84
Lives for gear
 
PettyCash's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ardis View Post
Yeah not really interested in anything more and recommended this to others, so am feeling bad about that. Do you know if they charge for license transfers? Not really sure if that's even worth doing at this point....I can't believe that this will cost almost as much as I paid for it, to upgrade and get on more than one computer.....

Feeling ripped off......
To be honest... if you've been enjoying your purchase prior to the announced upgrade, you can continue using what you have and reaping the benefits that it brings to your work.

If you decide at a later point that you need something like Systemwide, and the upgrade price is still the same, then the upgrade is worth the price. For zero latency performance alone, it isn't worth the upgrade price, but not having zero latency performance never stopped Ref 3 from becoming a go-to product for a lot of people. Your Ref 3 purchase isn't obsolete if you still have a use for the headphone correction... put simply, you don't NEED Ref 4, so don't even sweat it.
Old 17th October 2017
  #85
Lives for gear
 
stella645's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ardis View Post
Yeah not really interested in anything more and recommended this to others, so am feeling bad about that. Do you know if they charge for license transfers? Not really sure if that's even worth doing at this point....I can't believe that this will cost almost as much as I paid for it, to upgrade and get on more than one computer.....

Feeling ripped off......
Well seems like you paid a very low price for ref3....rrp is €69 I think?
You got a license for 3 computers for no extra cost and I assume it will carry on working for a long time if you don't upgrade.
So not sure you're entitled to feel too ripped off...maybe just a little disgruntled
Old 17th October 2017
  #86
Lives for gear
 
Deckdaddy's Avatar
Upgraded today and so far so good. I like Systemwide, I just didn’t want to pay the full price earlier on. But it’s real nice to have for web/spotify (use Audirvana with Ref4 for iTunes).
Old 17th October 2017
  #87
Gear Guru
Quote:
Originally Posted by stella645 View Post
Well seems like you paid a very low price for ref3....rrp is €69 I think?
You got a license for 3 computers for no extra cost and I assume it will carry on working for a long time if you don't upgrade.
So not sure you're entitled to feel too ripped off...maybe just a little disgruntled
No I need to upgrade my license for 30 Euros to be able to use on 3 computers. That's why I'm angry. with a $14- upgrade fee additional.

From the site:

If you purchased a headphone plugin license back when it cost 69 EUR/USD, you can activate the plugin on only one machine simultaneously. However, we offer a 30 EUR/USD upgrade option to add two additional plugin instances to the license. If you would like to upgrade your license or need to transfer your license to another computer, please submit a request here.

Feels like "bait and switch" to me, or maybe I have something wrong? I hope so...BTW I bought a new computer so only found this out when I wanted to transfer....Really really sucks.....
Old 17th October 2017
  #88
Lives for gear
 
stella645's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ardis View Post
No I need to upgrade my license for 30 Euros to be able to use on 3 computers. That's why I'm angry. with a $14- upgrade fee additional.
Ahh...sorry, didn't realise they had single instance licenses, thought all users had three.
Old 17th October 2017
  #89
Lives for gear
 
PettyCash's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ardis View Post
No I need to upgrade my license for 30 Euros to be able to use on 3 computers. That's why I'm angry. with a $14- upgrade fee additional
That makes a lot more sense now.
Old 17th October 2017
  #90
Gear Guru
Quote:
Originally Posted by stella645 View Post
Ahh...sorry, didn't realise they had single instance licenses, thought all users had three.
Hey thanks for responding! Yeah I thought when I bought a license, was a "for real" one. I honestly don't understand this either.....
Topic:
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
Forum Jump
Forum Jump