sounds great, hungry for CPU - Fxpansion.com

Forum

FXpansion Forum

sounds great, hungry for CPU

Support forum for Tremor

Moderators: Drew_BFDTeam, Andreas_FX, Rory_FX, Rhi_FX, Paul_fx, clare_fx, SKoT_FX, Steve_FX, Mully_FX, mayur_FX, Angus_FX, Moderators

oish1
Posts: 7
Joined: Sat Jan 02, 2010 8:48 am

sounds great, hungry for CPU

Postby oish1 » Mon Jan 09, 2012 9:54 pm

freezing in the DAW is kind of a pain in the ass since you have to do it every time your pattern changes, since this is a major release I'm sure you aren't adding any new features but did you guys ever kick around the idea of adding some sort of sample freeze option so once you've dialed in your sound it's a bit easier on the cpu?

robopuma
Posts: 123
Joined: Wed Jul 27, 2005 1:17 am

Postby robopuma » Tue Jan 10, 2012 6:52 pm

I hadn't looked at the CPU meter in Live until now, good thing you mentioned. Yeah it kind of does use a lot of CPU, I'm also curious what ways there might be to optimize it.

I loaded Tremor into a Live set at 123bpm & made a quick 4/4 pattern using all 8 drum voices. I turned off the pre, filter, and the post sections for every drum voice. I removed all FX & completely disabled the FX section of each voice & the master by turning off the active switch. No graphs used, no modulation, no filters, no FX and I was getting CPU peaks about 24%. I removed Tremor from the track, then loaded an instance of Microtonic which also used all 8 voices & came up with about 3% steady on the Live's CPU meter.

I like both plugins in their own right, but I'm trying to figure out why Tremor should be worth almost 8 times the CPU hit. There are more synth parameters and modulation control with Tremor & it has sub oscs. And I realize Microtonic is a more simple, older design & could be considered unusually efficient. But still, there's quite a big difference remaining.

If there's any further optimizations or things to disable that I might have overlooked, let me know.

Colors In Waves
Posts: 9
Joined: Fri May 28, 2010 7:39 pm

Postby Colors In Waves » Wed Jan 11, 2012 1:46 pm

I'm quite pleased for a plugin like this to eat CPU because you know it's going into something worth while...like circuit modelling.

boost303
Posts: 40
Joined: Fri Dec 21, 2007 7:13 pm

Postby boost303 » Wed Jan 11, 2012 5:11 pm

the cpu usage is the reason i havent bought it immediately, it almost takes 60% of my quadcore cpu's thats an extremely high load

robopuma
Posts: 123
Joined: Wed Jul 27, 2005 1:17 am

Postby robopuma » Wed Jan 11, 2012 5:30 pm

coloursinwaves wrote:you know it's going into something worth while...like circuit modelling.

How do you know for sure what the CPU is going towards?

I totally get your point and would normally agree, but when I close my eyes & listen to Tremor with the FX turned off, the raw sounds themselves (both preset or tweaked myself to the best of my ability) don't sound any "better" than some other drum synth plugins I use. It certainly doesn't sound worse, but not better enough either to warrant a huge CPU hit, just a different flavor that might be nice to have. No noticeable extra sheen, transparency, or "analog-likeness" (on top of just sounding good) that puts it in the very upper echelon as some of the newer u-he plugins for example, where the CPU hit is higher, but you notice a difference in sound right away from something that uses less CPU. Of course this is IMO and sound is subjective to different people.

So that's why I question why does it have to use so much CPU. I'm not bashing Tremor (I actually quite like it). But the CPU use doesn't seem to match the output of what it's actually doing compared to my experience with other plugins, so I can't help but to suspect some inefficiency. 3 instances of tremor (in an empty Live set w/no other plugins) brought my 2.66Ghz i7 Macbook Pro to a grinding halt! It could run 2 instances OK, but with not much any CPU left for anything else.
Last edited by robopuma on Wed Jan 11, 2012 5:49 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Drew_BFDTeam
Posts: 3883
Joined: Fri Jul 21, 2006 5:32 pm
Location: London, UK

Postby Drew_BFDTeam » Wed Jan 11, 2012 5:47 pm

Each voice effectively triggers 8 oscillators - because the oscillator in Tremor is a cloud oscillator. That is the first culprit of high CPU. The next would probably be the filters, since they're analog modelled. It is a heavy plugin and the system requirements do reflect that.

We spent a long time making sure the CPU usage was as low as it could go. I'm afraid your host-freeze/bounce facilities might be your best bet at the moment.

philait
Posts: 22
Joined: Tue Sep 13, 2011 7:48 pm

Postby philait » Wed Jan 11, 2012 9:40 pm

robopuma wrote:
coloursinwaves wrote:you know it's going into something worth while...like circuit modelling.

How do you know for sure what the CPU is going towards?

I totally get your point and would normally agree, but when I close my eyes & listen to Tremor with the FX turned off, the raw sounds themselves (both preset or tweaked myself to the best of my ability) don't sound any "better" than some other drum synth plugins I use. It certainly doesn't sound worse, but not better enough either to warrant a huge CPU hit, just a different flavor that might be nice to have. No noticeable extra sheen, transparency, or "analog-likeness" (on top of just sounding good) that puts it in the very upper echelon as some of the newer u-he plugins for example, where the CPU hit is higher, but you notice a difference in sound right away from something that uses less CPU. Of course this is IMO and sound is subjective to different people.

So that's why I question why does it have to use so much CPU. I'm not bashing Tremor (I actually quite like it). But the CPU use doesn't seem to match the output of what it's actually doing compared to my experience with other plugins, so I can't help but to suspect some inefficiency. 3 instances of tremor (in an empty Live set w/no other plugins) brought my 2.66Ghz i7 Macbook Pro to a grinding halt! It could run 2 instances OK, but with not much any CPU left for anything else.


There's some this seriously wrong there mate!
4 instances Running HugeChewinggum (the highest CPU preset I found in a hurry!) in Reaper Macbook Pro i7 2.66ghz here and I'm running at Devastating (NOT!) 20-25% CPU.
Thats 4 Full drum kits playing in sync something I would never normally do.

I'm not trying to knock you I'm just saying you may want to look into whats going on as that should not bring a Macbook pro to it's knees, as it doesn't on mine which seems to be the same as yours judging by your CPU specs.

:)

robopuma
Posts: 123
Joined: Wed Jul 27, 2005 1:17 am

Postby robopuma » Wed Jan 11, 2012 10:50 pm

OK, I loaded that same preset HugeChewingGum and I'm still not able to get more than 2 instances. When I add a third, crackling 104% on Live's CPU meter and things almost come to a halt.

Nothing wrong here. Running Tremor in Reaper is an apples/oranges comparison. It's well known that Live is a less efficient host, due to the way it handles audio & plugins to be able to process, rearrange things live in real time without stopping the music. Do you have Live? If so, try to host it in there, I'm sure you'll come up with something similar.

Anyway the point to make here is not about Live, it's about the side by side CPU usage of Tremor relative to other synthesis based drum plugins. And that comparison should be able to be seen using any host.

The cloud oscillator design sounds interesting which has been named the main culprit. It's something I've never heard of & interested in the technology. But I'm not sure I'm able to pick out from the sounds produced the advantage of the cloud oscillators vs normal oscillators that make the CPU penalty worthwhile. Perhaps more time creating sounds from scratch would be needed?

legomonster
Posts: 5
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 2010 5:08 pm

Cpu Requirements are too high!

Postby legomonster » Wed Jan 11, 2012 11:50 pm

Hi,

having bought the product this evening on first appraisal I really like tremor, but I cannot use it in ableton at all as the cpu requirements are simply too high and it's not practical for me to freeze every other track just to work on the tremor track. Is oversampling employed? could this be switched off optionally? Would it be possible to include an economy mode? or even to switch the oscillators to a lower quality mode (Even replacing them with blit based oscillators in economy mode)? Also in a great many cases for a drum patch only require a sine wave oscillator noise and a filter and modulation so maybe having the ability to switch on and off different modules would help those of us with CPU problems and make it more practical for a wider audience to use tremor as not everyone has an i7 cpu.

User avatar
SKoT_FX
Promulgator of Beats
Posts: 2419
Joined: Tue Sep 21, 2004 9:51 am
Location: FX Australia, Perth
Contact:

Postby SKoT_FX » Thu Jan 12, 2012 4:27 am

We will continue to look at ways of doing smart-shutdown of unused sections of the synthesizer engine; Tremor has already had a lot of time spent on optimzation, sometimes there are only so many ways you can reduce the maths without compromising the design. We will continue to do what we can, of course.

The reality is that the core synth engine is Strobe-like in complexity, and there's 8 of them, and they have 24 effects between them, and if each of those uses a percent each, you get to 25% of a core quite quickly. The synthesis and modelling are not simplistic - you can make simple noises with them, but a preset that really goes to town with Transmod morphing will show the amount of maths that is going on.
SKoT McDonald
CTO FXpansion]

philait
Posts: 22
Joined: Tue Sep 13, 2011 7:48 pm

Postby philait » Thu Jan 12, 2012 7:48 am

robopuma wrote:OK, I loaded that same preset HugeChewingGum and I'm still not able to get more than 2 instances. When I add a third, crackling 104% on Live's CPU meter and things almost come to a halt.

Nothing wrong here. Running Tremor in Reaper is an apples/oranges comparison. It's well known that Live is a less efficient host, due to the way it handles audio & plugins to be able to process, rearrange things live in real time without stopping the music. Do you have Live? If so, try to host it in there, I'm sure you'll come up with something similar.

Anyway the point to make here is not about Live, it's about the side by side CPU usage of Tremor relative to other synthesis based drum plugins. And that comparison should be able to be seen using any host.

The cloud oscillator design sounds interesting which has been named the main culprit. It's something I've never heard of & interested in the technology. But I'm not sure I'm able to pick out from the sounds produced the advantage of the cloud oscillators vs normal oscillators that make the CPU penalty worthwhile. Perhaps more time creating sounds from scratch would be needed?


Thanks for the response,
I knew Reaper was more efficient I didn't realise the difference was so great.
I've got Live lite on a Novation bundle disk that I've never used. I'll load it up when I get a moment and have a go.
Thanks.

1mon
Posts: 7
Joined: Mon May 03, 2010 4:36 am

Postby 1mon » Thu Jan 12, 2012 8:59 am

OK, I loaded that same preset HugeChewingGum and I'm still not able to get more than 2 instances. When I add a third, crackling 104% on Live's CPU meter and things almost come to a halt.




I absolutely love the fun I have with tremor and I'm few steps closer to buy a new MBP or MBA to get most out of this fun :D

My dualcore MB runs one instance of HugeChewingGum cpu peaking around 60-70% - still possible to play with IM(Workflow)O. Although Tremor is quite compliant with old HW I'd expect to get more power from i7...

legomonster
Posts: 5
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 2010 5:08 pm

Postby legomonster » Thu Jan 12, 2012 10:52 am

The reality is that the core synth engine is Strobe-like in complexity, and there's 8 of them, and they have 24 effects between them, and if each of those uses a percent each, you get to 25% of a core quite quickly. The synthesis and modelling are not simplistic - you can make simple noises with them, but a preset that really goes to town with Transmod morphing will show the amount of maths that is going on.


I guess one of the things I'm asking is would it be possible to add a simpler type of oscillator, that can be used when the cloud oscillator is overkill?

User avatar
davecmcgrath
Posts: 140
Joined: Mon May 24, 2010 12:11 pm

Postby davecmcgrath » Thu Jan 12, 2012 8:11 pm

Wow just downloaded and run Tremor, very nice sounds and simple to use, but in protools 8 on my iMac 3 GHz with 12Gb RAM it used up to 34 percent of my CPU RTAS allocation which is really high in a session only containing one instrument track with Tremor. Running BFD2 and loads of plugins in a normal session for me doesn't use that much grunt. Before I would buy this I need to run in proper sessions to see if my Mac can cope !!
Nice work though and glad to see discount finally for BFD owners :)
iMac 3.00 Ghz 12 Gb RAM OSX Yosemite, BFD ECO, BFD2, BFD3, Protools PT11, MBox2, Dell Studio 15 laptop Intel Core2 Duo P8600(2.4 Ghz), 4Gb Ram, Windows 7 64 Bit Ultimate, Alesis DM10 drums , Roland SPD-S

Glittercloud
Posts: 27
Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2011 7:07 am

Postby Glittercloud » Fri Jan 13, 2012 12:32 pm

Agreed It's high.

However, once I've made my own preset's and have been modest about use of chain FX, I'm sure I will get it under control.

Some outputs will probably get routed to a bus for dynamic control through 'Izotope Alloy' for myself.


Return to “Tremor”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 12 guests

cron